A defendant who was excluded from an in-chambers meeting to determine whether her counsel had a conflict of interest or should otherwise be relieved was entitled to habeas relief. The defendant here challenged her California conviction on the ground that she was denied due process of law at a critical stage of her case with harm to ability to defend herself when she was excluded from in camera hearings on the matter, at which her present counsel was relieved and a new attorney was appointed. The deputy district attorney was present at the hearing but defendant was not. The defendant later unsuccessfully moved to remove appointed counsel and substitute new counsel; she also filed complaints against the new attorney with the state bar. The Ninth Circuit found a clear violation of her due process rights, noting that the prejudice was made clear by her subsequent conflicts with the attorney who was appointed in her absence.