People v. Breslin
205 Cal. App. 4th 1409
| Cal. Ct. App. | 2012Background
- Breslin pled guilty to corporal injury to a spouse or cohabitant under §273.5(a) as part of a plea agreement; other charges were dismissed and probation was to be imposed.
- Police and victim accounts from March 23, 2011 show Breslin allegedly assaulted the victim; Breslin appeared intoxicated and denied culpability in later statements, claiming the injury was self-inflicted or accidental.
- There was a current protective order against Breslin involving the victim, and a prior domestic violence history with the same victim heightened ongoing risk.
- On May 25, 2011 Breslin moved to withdraw her plea and to continue sentencing, attaching a sworn declaration from the victim recounting a recanted version of events and a desire to speak with the DA.
- The trial court denied the motion to withdraw and Breslin’s probation was revoked; Breslin appealed claiming lack of knowing and voluntary plea due to ineffective assistance for failure to interview the victim before the plea.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Withdrawal of guilty plea proper standard | Breslin argues she lacked a knowing, voluntary plea due to undisclosed recantation | Court should apply liberal good-cause standard and evaluate the record | No abuse of discretion; no clear good cause shown |
| Ineffective assistance—failure to interview victim | Counsel failed to interview the victim pre-plea, undermining intelligent decision | Counsel’s performance was reasonable given domestic-violence history and protective orders; no prejudice shown | No deficient performance and no prejudice; Strickland standard not satisfied |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Nance, 1 Cal.App.4th 1453 (Cal. Ct. App. 1991) (good cause to withdraw plea requires clear and convincing evidence of error or mistake)
- People v. Fairbank, 16 Cal.4th 1223 (Cal. 1997) (review of plea withdrawal within court's discretion; abuse of discretion standard)
- Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 (U.S. 1985) (prejudice prong for guilty pleas under Strickland standard)
- In re Resendiz, 25 Cal.4th 230 (Cal. 2001) (prejudice analysis for guilty pleas in ineffective assistance context)
- In re Alvernaz, 2 Cal.4th 924 (Cal. 1992) (corroboration required for self-serving plea prejudice claims)
- People v. Watts, 67 Cal.App.3d 173 (Cal. Ct. App. 1977) (recantation timing; not persuasive to undermine plea)