Ineffective-assistance-of-counsel

Questions Presented Petitioner raises the following questions: 1. In the first place, was Petitioner denied his Sixth Amendment right to the effective assistance of counsel when his court-appointed trial attorney failed to advise him that he had no defense to the ADW charge or the sentencing enhancements and was certain to be found guilty of those charges and to be sentenced to a longer term than the prosecution was offering, and, therefore, had no rational choice but to accept the offer, but, instead, advised him that they were going to beat the case? 2. Was Petitioner denied his Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment rights to due process and equal protection when, on habeas corpus in the California Court of Appeal and Supreme Court, those courts failed to follow California Supreme Court decisional law (see, e.g., People v. Duvall, 9 Cal.4th 464, 474-475 (1995); People v. Pope, 23 Cal.3d 412, 426 (1979)), which requires the courts, when a petitioner alleges facts which make out a