Where defendant instructs his trial counsel to move for a new trial based on ineffectiveness of counsel, trial court must hold Marsden hearing. In an appeal from his conviction for attempted murder, Mejia argued that the trial court’s failure to hold a Marsden hearing at the time of the probation and sentencing hearing required a reversal. The appellate court agreed and reversed with directions to hold a Marsden hearing. The court rejected respondent’s argument that there was no Marsden motion made below. The record shows that Mejia instructed his counsel to move for a new trial based on his performance at trial, and counsel informed the court of this. This was adequate to put the trial court on notice of defendant’s request for a Marsden hearing. The court did not address the other issues raised by Mejia in deference to the doctrine of ripeness.