Commonwealth v. Bolduc
Massachusetts Appeals Court
1ConcurrenceBrown, J.
I fully concur with the majority’s conclusion that, at the time he entered his guilty plea, the defendant was denied the effective assistance of counsel. Unlike the majority, however, I also conclude that the ineffective assistance of counsel stemmed from a conflict of interest in his attorney’s representation of him and his two codefendants.
The Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution mandates that an attorney give his client his undivided loyalty. Glasser v. United States, 315 U. S. 60, 70, 75-76 (1942). This is true whether counsel is court appointed or retained. United States v.…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Johnson v. ZerbstSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Glasser v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Commonwealth v. SaferianMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1974
- Dukes v. Warden, Connecticut State PrisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- United States v. Rufus GainesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1976
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.