Failure to communicate a plea bargain could become a factor in a Connecticut habeas corpus petition. You can learn more about failures on this page. Multiple authorities require defense counsel to communicate to the defendant any plea bargain extended by the prosecution. Also see Missouri v. Frye, 566 U.S. at , 132 S.Ct. at 1408 (“This Court now holds that, as a general rule, defense counsel has the duty to communicate formal offers from the prosecution to accept a plea on terms and conditions that may be favorable to the accused”).
See also H.P.T. v. Commissioner, 127 Conn. App. 480, 483- 84 (2011)(counsel must provide adequate notice of plea offer), rev’d on other grounds, 310 Conn. 606 (2013); In addition, see Sanders v. Commissioner, 83 Conn. App. 543, 546-52 (counsel must “meaningfully explain” plea offer to client), cert. denied, 271 Conn. 914 (2004); Also see generally Practice Book §§ 39-3, 39-19 and 39-20; Also consider ABA Standards for Criminal Justice, Defense Function (3rd Ed. 1993), Standard 4-3.8 Duty to Keep Client Informed (“(a) Defense counsel should keep the client informed of the developments in the case…”).
In addition, see the Standard 4-6.2 Plea Discussions (“(a) Defense counsel should keep the accused advised of developments arising out of plea discussions conducted with the prosecutor. (b) Defense counsel should promptly communicate and explain to the accused all significant plea proposals made by the prosecutor”); And see ABA Standards for Criminal Justice, Pleas of Guilty (3rd Ed. 1999), Standard 14-3.2 Responsibilities of Defense Counsel (“(a) Defense counsel should keep the defendant advised of developments arising out of plea discussions conducted with the prosecuting attorney, and should promptly communicate and explain to the defendant all plea offers made by the prosecuting attorney”); In addition, you can see Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 1.4 Communication.
Failure to Communicate
Also remember, defense counsel’s failure to communicate to the defendant a plea bargain offered by the prosecution constitutes deficient performance under Strickland. In addition, see Frye , 566 U.S. at , 132 S.Ct. at 1408 (“When defense counsel allowed the offer to expire without advising the defendant or allowing him to consider it, defense counsel did not render the effective assistance of counsel the Constitution requires”). Also, prejudice under Strickland is established when it is shown that the defendant would have accepted the plea bargain had he known about it and there is no reasonable probability the trial judge would have rejected the plea bargain or refused the defendant’s plea. See Frye, 566 U.S. at , 132 S.Ct. at 1409-10.
Ask a Connecticut Habeas Attorney about Failure to Communicate Plea Bargains
Do you have questions about failure to communicate plea bargain in Connecticut habeas corpus cases? You can learn more by contacting an attorney.