Court Opinion

ID: 9440640
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 17:00:31.684206+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:27:50.662379
License: Public Domain

E. GRADY JOLLY,
concurring specially.
I concur in the result, but write separately to note that Presley brings a claim for denial of counsel, yet we have treated his claim as one for ineffective assistance of counsel. As we have said, Presley’s plea preserved one avenue of appeal: ineffective assistance of counsel. The government, however, does not point out the distinction between a denial of counsel claim and an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, and has waived its right to hold Presley to his word. United States v. Acquaye, 452 F.3d 380, 381-82 (5th Cir.2006). I nonetheless concur in the result, because Presley was not denied counsel at a critical stage of the proceedings; the September 3 hearing was not critical because Presley has already been granted two additional hearings on the same issue.