¶1Granted. This post-conviction relief matter is remanded to the district court for another evidentiary hearing, at which evidence should be allowed relating to the viability of an insanity defense at the time of defendant’s guilty plea, and for reconsideration, in light of such evidence and the previous evidence adduced, of the claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. The court should also consider whether, under the circumstances of defendant’s minimal representation by appointed counsel, there was a “constructive denial” of counsel from which prejudice should be presumed.
624 So. 2d 1209
State v. Sheppard
Decided September 24, 1993
Supreme Court of Louisiana · decided 1993-09-24
Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently November 1994
1 state decisions
Key passage — most relied on by later courts
“at which evidence should be allowed relating to the viability of an insanity defense at the time of defendant's guilty plea, and for reconsideration, in light of such evidence and the previous evidence adduced, of the claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. The court should also consider whether, under the circumstances of defendant's minimal representation by appointed counsel, there was a "constructive denial" of counsel from which prejudice should be presumed. [2] State v. Sheppard, 624 So.2d 1209 (La.1993).”
quoted by 1 later decision, including State v. Sheppard
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1993-09-24
View the full empirical analysis of this case →