People of Michigan v. Alain Fraser Klingbail, 332903

Background

Defendant Alain Klingbail was charged with resisting/assaulting an officer and first‑degree home invasion after forcibly entering the home of an 89‑year‑old woman while intoxicated; initial information alleged entry with intent to assault and a habitual offender notice.
In district court, with appointed counsel Clark, defendant waived the prelim and pleaded nolo contendere to a reduced charge of third‑degree home invasion (five‑year felony); the prosecutor agreed to drop the resisting charge and habitual enhancement; the court did not recite the statutory elements for first or third‑degree home invasion at that plea.
Defendant later retained private counsel Ferguson, who advised withdrawing the favorable plea, asserting the charge was improper and promising to negotiate a misdemeanor plea or to win at trial; the circuit court allowed withdrawal after admonishing defendant that there would be no further plea negotiations.
The prosecutor amended the information to proceed on an alternate theory of first‑degree home invasion (commission of a felony/assault while inside), trial proceeded, the victim died before trial, defense did not present intoxication or mistake‑of‑identity evidence, and the jury convicted; defendant was sentenced to 3–20 years.
On Ginther (evidentiary) hearing, testimony revealed Ferguson had misinterpreted MCL 750.110a(2), failed timely to advise defendant that the prosecution could amend to an alternate theory, did not secure the victim’s testimony before she died, and encouraged plea withdrawal despite the court’s warning that no new deals would be permitted.

Issues

Issue	People/Prosecution/Court Argument	Klingbail/Ferguson Argument	Held (dissent)
Whether defense counsel was constitutionally ineffective in advising withdrawal of the plea	The court and prosecutor emphasized defendant knowingly rejected a favorable plea and that withdrawal was defendant’s choice; defense conduct was a bad strategic gamble, not deficient performance	Ferguson argued he reasonably believed the initial factual basis did not support first‑degree home invasion and that the client could obtain a misdemeanor or win at trial; he relied on perceived weaknesses in the police report and on the victim’s likely testimony	Counsel was constitutionally ineffective: Ferguson failed to understand and convey that first‑degree home invasion could be proved under alternative statutory theories and that the prosecutor could amend the information; this performance fell below prevailing professional norms
Whether counsel's deficiency was prejudicial (Lafler standard)	The court found defendant voluntarily chose to withdraw and suffered the consequences of a losing gamble; no entitlement to restart process	Klingbail argued that but for counsel’s bad advice he would have accepted and completed the prior favorable plea, which carried a materially lesser sentence and alternatives (county jail/boot camp)	Prejudice established: but for bad advice there is a reasonable probability the plea would have stood and the outcome (lesser charge/sentence) would have been more favorable
Whether the trial judge’s warnings cured counsel’s deficient advice	The court relied on the judge’s strong admonition that withdrawal was unwise and that there would be no further negotiations	Klingbail contended judicial admonitions do not substitute for competent counsel and do not remedy erroneous legal advice	Judicial warnings do not cure counsel’s ineffective assistance; counsel must provide competent legal advice (Padilla/Lee analogy)
Appropriate remedy for counsel’s ineffective assistance	The court denied a new trial and treated withdrawal as defendant’s choice, refusing to remand for reoffer of plea	Klingbail sought reversal and relief under Lafler; counsel and defendant argued the original plea should be reinstated/offered	Remedy under Lafler: require prosecution to reoffer the original plea so the court can decide whether to vacate the trial conviction or accept the plea; remand to the district judge who accepted the plea for proceedings consistent with Lafler

Key Cases Cited

People v Douglas, 496 Mich. 557 (Michigan Supreme Court 2014) (defendant entitled to effective assistance in plea bargaining)
Lafler v Cooper, 566 U.S. 156 (U.S. Supreme Court 2012) (standards and remedy when ineffective counsel causes rejection of plea offer)
Wiggins v Smith, 539 U.S. 510 (U.S. Supreme Court 2003) (Strickland standard for deficient performance)
Strickland v Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. Supreme Court 1984) (two‑part test for ineffective assistance)
Padilla v Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356 (U.S. Supreme Court 2010) (counsel must provide correct advice on critical collateral consequences; judicial colloquy does not cure counsel’s deficient advice)
Simko v Blake, 448 Mich. 648 (Michigan Supreme Court 1995) (standard for attorney competence in criminal matters; legal malpractice principles)
McCarthy v United States, 394 U.S. 459 (U.S. Supreme Court 1969) (plea colloquy assists judge in ensuring voluntariness but does not replace counsel’s role)
United States v Batamula, 788 F.3d 166 (6th Cir. 2015) (judicial warning does not necessarily cure prejudice from counsel’s erroneous advice)
Smith v Lewis, 13 Cal.3d 349 (California Supreme Court 1975) (attorney must know plain and elementary principles and undertake reasonable research)