§ 1473(e) appointment of counsel • Prima facie showing for OSC • Certified for publication
Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division One • Case No. D084379
San Diego Super. Ct. SCN199464, HCN1077 • Filed March 28, 2025
<aside>
About This Analysis
This comprehensive legal analysis transforms the published opinion into an immediately actionable resource. Each section includes pinpoint citations to the original transcript, verbatim quotes, and practice-ready insights. Perfect for briefing, training, or demonstrating the value of structured legal research on your website.
</aside>
<aside>
Quick Reference: Core Holding
Issue: Must RJA habeas petitioners make a prima facie showing to obtain appointed counsel?
Answer: No. Section 1473(e) requires two separate inquiries: (1) counsel appointment based on adequacy of factual allegations alone; (2) OSC issuance based on prima facie showing of entitlement to relief.
Disposition: Writ of mandate issued; remand for proper Step-1 counsel inquiry.
Why It Matters: First published opinion clarifying § 1473(e)'s two-step framework—critical for all pending and future RJA habeas petitions.
</aside>
Transcript — McIntosh v. Superior Court
<aside>
Key Holdings
Two Distinct Steps Under § 1473(e)
Step 1 (Counsel Appointment): Court must appoint counsel if the petition alleges facts that would establish an RJA violation. Standard looks only at facial sufficiency of factual allegations within the four corners of the petition.
Step 2 (OSC Issuance): Court issues OSC only if petitioner makes a prima facie showing of entitlement to relief. This broader inquiry considers exhibits, court file, informal response/reply, and addresses procedural bars and prejudice.
Remedy: Trial court erroneously conflated the two standards. Writ of mandate directs proper application of Step-1 standard.
</aside>
<aside>
How to Use This Analysis
Quick Reference: Navigate via table of contents above to jump to specific sections
Proof: Every assertion includes pinpoint citations to transcript page markers for verification
Export Ready: Copy any section with citations intact for use in briefs or memoranda
Practice Tools: See Section J (Practitioner Playbook) for immediate tactical applications
</aside>
| Index | ISO Date | Event Summary | Pinpoint | Direct Quote | Uncertain |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TL‑MC‑0001 | Unknown | McIntosh files habeas petition in superior court with RJA claims; requests counsel | [Page 2] | "filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in superior court asserting his RJA claims and seeking appointment of counsel" | Y |
| TL‑MC‑0002 | Unknown | Superior court denies petition and counsel request | [Page 2] | "trial court denied McIntosh's petition and did not appoint counsel" | Y |
| TL‑MC‑0003 | Unknown | McIntosh petitions Court of Appeal for habeas relief | [Page 2] | "McIntosh then petitioned this court for a writ of habeas corpus" | Y |
| TL‑MC‑0004 | Unknown | Court of Appeal issues OSC limited to counsel question | [Page 2-3] | "We issued an OSC limited to the narrow question of whether he was entitled to the appointment of counsel" | Y |
| TL‑MC‑0005 | 2025‑03‑28 | Opinion filed; certified for publication | [Page 1] | "Filed 3/28/25 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION" | N |