stating that although counsel was disbarred before trial, the Court's argument that "a lawyer suspended or disbarred during trial is not per se ineffective" holds true because defendants must still prove both prongs of the Strickland test
Summary of this case from Majkut v. HymanNo. 03-8058.
January 26, 2004.
C.A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 338 F. 3d 1054.
stating that although counsel was disbarred before trial, the Court's argument that "a lawyer suspended or disbarred during trial is not per se ineffective" holds true because defendants must still prove both prongs of the Strickland test
Summary of this case from Majkut v. HymanFull title:Ross v. UNITED STATES
Court:U.S.
Date published: Jan 26, 2004
Moreover, Petitioner's new evidence regarding trial counsel's recent disbarment and allegations of drug and…