The Right to Counsel. The Sixth Amendment guarantees criminal I.
defendant 's the right to effective assistance of counsel. Medina 's counsel failed
to investigate and prepare for a speedy trial hearing, then incorrectly thought
speedy trial "prejudice was presumed". Because of this, Medina requested
alternate defense counsel (ADC) and filed a malpractice complaint. Despite the
obvious conflict, the court denied ADC and the claim of ineffective counsel. Did
these deficiencies cause a conflict of interest, entitling Medina to ADC?

The Right to Speedy Trial. The constitution guarantees defendants the II.
right to speedy trial. Medina 's speedy trial claim was denied on direct appeal
because counsel failed to submit evidence proving cell phone data was actually
irretrievable. But Medina provided counsel affidavit 's demonstrating his cell
phone data is unavailable from any other source. So, Barker v. Wingo, prejudice
was satisfied, but the district court continually overlooks this evidence. Does the
court deny a meritorious claim by ignoring key evidence?

Breach of Contract. Plea agreements are contractual and bind the III.
parties, including the court. Medina 's plea agreement promised him the right to
appeal his constitutional speedy trial issue, as raised in his pro se motions. But
Medina 's dispositive claim continues to be overlooked in violation of the plea
agreement. Promises must be kept. Does a breach of the terms in the contract
render the plea void with an unfillable promise?

Question not identified