California Legal Brief

AI-Generated Practitioner Briefs of California Appellate Opinions

ineffective assistance of counsel

8 opinions tagged “ineffective assistance of counsel”

P. v. Berch 5/4/26 CA2/6

The Rule of People v. Berch is that felony false imprisonment based on menace does not require a threat to inflict force that is greater than necessary to effectuate restraint on a person's liberty, under circumstances where menace involves a threat to inflict injury upon another person.

In re Z.G. 4/27/26 SC

The Rule of In re Z.G. is that a juvenile court may not terminate parental rights merely by finding a likelihood of adoption but must also make one of the additional findings referenced in section 366.26, subdivision (c)(1), under circumstances where a parent has not received statutorily guaranteed reunification services and was not properly bypassed for such services.

P. v. C.F. 4/17/26 CA1/5

The Rule of People v. C.F. is that trial counsel renders ineffective assistance when failing to request a no-cost court reporter for a hearing on involuntary antipsychotic medication, under circumstances where the hearing provides the sole evidentiary basis for the court's order and the failure to secure a reporter is tantamount to waiver of the right to appeal.

In re Melson 4/2/26 CA2/1

The Rule of In re Melson is that the prosecution must correct false testimony from key eyewitnesses regarding what they previously told police during their identification process, even if the false statements appear to result from faulty memory rather than intentional perjury, under circumstances where the prosecutor knew or should have known the testimony was false based on available police interview transcripts and the false testimony could have contributed to the verdict.

P. v. Avena 3/26/26 CA4/2

The Rule of People v. Avena is that a defendant who went to trial may obtain relief under Penal Code section 1473.7 by showing a reasonable probability that they would have accepted an immigration-safe plea and that the prosecution and court would have accepted such a plea, under circumstances where intervening case law created immigration-safe plea options that were not available when counsel initially represented the defendant.

P. v. Gomez 1/28/26 CA4/1

The Rule of People v. Gomez is that use of animal imagery in criminal proceedings does not violate the Racial Justice Act when the animal reference is benign, endearing, and used solely to explain legal concepts rather than to dehumanize or exhibit racial bias, under circumstances where an objective observer would understand the comparison relates to the state of evidence rather than character traits.

P. v. Gutierrez 2/17/26 CA4/1

The Rule of People v. Gutierrez is that a Governor's state of emergency proclamation is subject to independent legal interpretation by courts, not jury determination, and when a proclamation limits emergency zones to specific "high hazard areas" to be identified by state agencies rather than declaring a statewide emergency, the prosecution must prove the crime occurred within those specifically identified areas, under circumstances where the proclamation's plain language directs agencies to identify particular zones rather than declaring the emergency exists throughout the entire state.

P. v. Riggs 3/16/26 CA4/1

The Rule of People v. Riggs is that an attorney's temporary administrative suspension from the State Bar for trust account reporting violations does not per se constitute ineffective assistance of counsel, under circumstances where the attorney was suspended for administrative noncompliance rather than resignation with disciplinary charges pending.