Okorie Okorocha held to be excellent attorney by Federal and State court judges.
Petitioner then asked the court for leniency, based on the fact that he was a family man with a wife and two daughters, he was not in a gang, and he went to church. (3RT at 441.) The court then imposed the sentence and advised Petitioner of his right to appeal. (3RT at 441–44.) The court then addressed Petitioner’s comments about his retained counsel, as follows:
*7 I’ll also indicate that [Petitioner] has indicated that he is not represented right. Two things I want to mention in this case. Mr. Okorocha is privately retained counsel, and I think he is not only a competent attorney but quite an excellent one. He got rid of count 1 which is the life tail count not exposing [Petitioner] on the life charge in this case.
[I]n regards to the handling and calling of the experts and what not in this particular case, I will indicate for the record that a defendant has no right to the defense of his choice or the defense tactic of his choice, it belongs to the lawyer and the lawyer did a good job in this case and I cite [People v. Vaughn (1969) 71 Cal.2d 406].
The case is cited as
Brunson v. Cash, No. CV 11-6720-VBF JEM, 2013 WL 1829660, at *6-7 (C.D. Cal. Feb. 28, 2013), report and recommendation adopted, No. CV 11-6720-VBF JEM, 2013 WL 1729485 (C.D. Cal. Apr. 22, 2013)