Case Caption: Encarnacion vs. TestamarkCase Number: SCT-CIV-2020-0118Date: 09/08/2023Author: Hodge, Rhys S. Citation: 2023 VI 10Summary: In considering the petitioner’s appeal from the Superior Court’s denial of his petition for writ of habeas corpus, the Superior Court erred when it held that he failed to establish a prima facie case of ineffective assistance of counsel. Counsel’s complete failure to respond to the People’s motion or to otherwise take action after the Superior Court increased petitioner’s sentence nine months after issuance of the December 2, 2012 judgment and commitment was outside of the wide range of reasonable professional judgment and competent assistance, and the result of the proceeding would certainly have been different if petitioner had the actual assistance of a minimally competent attorney. Accordingly, the Superior Court’s November 13, 2020 order denying the petition is reversed. On remand, the Superior Court is directed to grant the habeas corpus petition and immediately provide post-conviction relief in the form of vacating the August 28, 2013 order and amended judgment and commitment, and reinstating the original December 2, 2012 judgment and commitment.Attachment: Open Document or Opinion