Legal Opinion

In Re Branch

California Supreme Court

Decided January 21, 1969No. Crim. 11483PublishedCited by 58 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPeters, J.

This petition involves petitioner’s claim of inadequacy of his representation in that his counsel failed to investigate his claim that prior to or during the trial he had told his counsel that he had information that other named convicts had committed the offense with which he was charged. Based on the entire record, we find that petitioner did not tell his counsel of these facts prior to or during the trial, and that the information given the attorney just prior to sentence was given under such circumstances that the attorney reasonably believed the testimony would be perjured. We also find…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Escobedo v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
  2. Powell v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
  3. People v. IbarraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1963
  4. Charles Earl Brubaker v. Fred R. Dickson, Warden of the California State Prison at San Quentin, CaliforniaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1962
  5. In Re SmileyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by58 opinions

  1. Imbler v. PachtmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. People v. LedesmaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1987
  3. In Re ClarkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993
  4. People v. RielCalifornia Supreme Court · 2000
  5. People v. RobertsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982

53 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API