Ernest C. Roe, Warden v. Lucio Flores-ortega (528 U.S. 470)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided February 23, 2000 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 528 U.S. 470 · 120 S. Ct. 1029
- Decided
- February 23, 2000
- Term
- October Term 1999
- Vote
- 6–3
- Majority author
- Justice O'Connor
- Issue area
- Criminal Procedure
- Disposition
- Vacated and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
Justice O’Connor delivered the opinion of the Gourt. In this case we must decide the proper framework for evaluating an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, based on counsel’s failure to file a notice of appeal without respondent’s consent. I The State of California charged respondent, Lucio Flores-Ortega, with one count of murder, two counts of assault, and a personal use of a deadly weapon enhancement allegation. In October 1993, respondent appeared in Superior Court with his court-appointed public defender, Nancy Kops, and a Spanish language interpreter, and pleaded guilty to second-degree murder. The plea was entered pursuant to a California rule permitting a defendant both to deny committing a crime and to admit that there is sufficient evidence to convict him. See People v. West, 3 Cal. 3d 595, 477 P. 2d 409 (1970). In exchange for the guilty plea, the state prosecutor moved to strike the allegation of personal use of a deadly weapon and to dismiss both assault charges. On November 10, 1993, respondent was sentenced to 15 years to life in state prison. After pronouncing sentence, the trial judge informed respondent, “You may file an appeal within 60 days from today’s date with this Court. If you do not have money for Counsel, Counsel will be appointed for you to represent you on your appeal.” App. 40. Although Ms. Kops wrote “bring appeal papers” in her file, no…
Excerpt of a 28,966-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.