Dooly v. People, 2013 CO 34

Dooly was convicted of kidnapping and related offenses and later appealed; direct appeal affirmed.
After conviction, Dooly sought postconviction relief and asked for counsel; he submitted Form 4 alleging unpresented material facts and ineffective assistance claims.
The public defender entered an appearance and moved for discovery under Crim. P. 16; later, Dooly asked for new counsel.
The district court denied new counsel and allowed the public defender to move for dismissal of the entire postconviction relief application under Crim. P. 12(a); the district court granted the dismissal.
The court of appeals affirmed, holding that Crim. P. 12(a) allowed a dismissal motion by counsel and that the public defender could file such a motion without Dooly’s express consent.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether dismissal of a postconviction relief application without client consent was proper.	Dooly argued counsel cannot dismiss his application without consent.	Public defender argued Crim. P. 12(a) authorizes dismissal by counsel.	Dismissal without informed consent was improper; reinstatement required.
Whether Crim. P. 12(a) permits dismissal of a postconviction relief application.	N/A	Crim. P. 12(a) allows dismissal of the motion as a procedural defense.	Crim. P. 12(a) does not authorize dismissal of postconviction relief applications.
What is the role of the public defender once appointed in postconviction matters?	Public defender must act in client’s interest, not to dismiss without consent.	Public defender may file motions on behalf of client, including dismissal.	Counsel cannot dismiss the client's postconviction relief without the client’s informed consent.
What is the proper remedy when counsel-dismissal occurs against a defendant’s wishes?	N/A	N/A	Reinstate the postconviction relief application and vacate improper dismissal.

Silva v. People, 156 P.3d 1164 (Colo. 2007) (limits right to counsel in postconviction and standards for competency)
Ardolino v. People, 69 P.3d 73 (Colo. 2003) (encourages postconviction review for ineffectiveness claims)
Massaro v. United States, 538 U.S. 500 (U.S. 2003) (district court best suited for ineffectiveness claims)
A.L.L. v. People, 226 P.3d 1054 (Colo. 2010) (counsel’s role and ethical duties regarding postconviction relief)
People v. Bergerud, 223 P.3d 686 (Colo. 2010) (trial counsel as captain of the ship; bounds of appellate strategy)
People v. Breaman, 939 P.2d 1348 (Colo. 1997) (limits on withdrawal and merits-based dismissal in postconviction context)
Jones v. Barnes, 463 U.S. 745 (U.S. 1983) (defense counsel cannot pursue client-advocated issues against client wishes)