An objective, disinterested observer with full knowledge of the circumstances could only conclude from these facts that Calhoun s prior attorney was the sole target of the investigation, and that other lawyers in the office, and their clients confidential information, would be protected from search. There is no basis for disqualifying any other Air Force lawyer, much less lawyers from other services or other government entities. This requires showing that counsel made errors so serious that counsel was not functioning as the 'counsel' guaranteed the defendant by the Sixth Amendment. Second, the defendant must show that the deficient performance prejudiced the defense. This requires showing that counsel's errors were so serious as to deprive the defendant of a fair trial, a trial whose result is reliable.
Defense counsel is presumed effective unless proven otherwise.
And the burden of proof lies with the defendant. At the trial, both Mr. Kastl and Captain Monheim advised Calhoun to reject appointed military defense counsel so as not to waive the extraordinary writ issue, and the military judge thoroughly cautioned him about the likely ramifications of a decision to proceed pro se . Mr. Kastl s expressed willingness to represent Calhoun at trial undercuts the conclusion that he improperly and unilaterally withdrew representation. Consequently, Calhoun expressly released Mr. Kastl from any obligation that might have been inferred from the circumstances. Any duty Mr. Kastl may have had towards Calhoun was satisfied.