Adnan fired CG before his sentencing and was represented by a public defender at sentencing, who did absolutely nothing for him. In the initial PCR motion & hearing, Justin Brown also argued IAC about the PD, because of a technical provision of Maryland law that allows a lawyer to preserve the right to have a resentencing hearing 5 years down the line. Apparently the PD didn't say the magic words to request that, so JB was arguing that was IAC and that Adnan (presumably) should be allowed another sentencing hearing to make up for that.

It's an odd argument to be making 10+ years down the line, but I thought that was the loophole he was trying to create to help the court fashion a remedy for the plea bargain failure. That is, there is this very narrow path in which COSA could say that CG fucked up by not properly exploring plea negotiation options, and lawyer 2 fucked up by not preserving a second-chance sentencing hearing... so the way to fix that now that Adnan has already spent 16 years in jail it to allow for another sentencing hearing.

It's a long shot argument, but I think that was and is probably the best argument that could be made.

The strong part about the plea negotiation issue is that the facts were uncontested -- the prosecutor had come to court and testified for the defense. But now that's been squandered because for reasons that are unfathomable to me, Brown has put another witness on the stand to call Urick a liar. So essentially he's impeached the credibility of his own key witness.

The whole he said/she said story of Urick's phone conversation with Asia is completely unnecessary to the case, and could have been chalked up as a simple misunderstanding. But now Brown has opened the door to Urick coming back to court and changing up his earlier testimony, and/or the judge deciding even without hearing from Urick again that his memory for details is suspect and that the whole story about there never being any plea negotiation discussion isn't credible.