Supremes Rule for Defendants

The U.S. Supreme Court in a pair of opinions today has recognized the importance of plea bargains in the criminal justice system – and has ruled that ineffective assistance of counsel can (and does) happen in plea bargained situations.

The two cases at issue – Missouri v. Frye and Lafler v. Cooper – the court recognized that plea deals are an integral part of the justice system (hell, without pleas the system would grind to a halt), and that policing the lawyering that's a part of the plea system is important.

Call it a surprising victory for criminal defendants bringing ineffective assistance of counsel claims.

In each case, Justice Anthony Kennedy opined for a 5-4 majority including Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.

In each of the cases, the defendant argued that he had rejected a plea offer based on the bad advice or the inaction of counsel, which ultimately led to – as Kennedy put it in the Lafler opinion, "a less favorable outcome." In the case of Blaine Lafler, who shot a woman in the buttocks and abdomen (she lived), he was told that the state couldn't prove its "assault with intent to murder" charge because the victim had been shot below the waist. Lafler didn't know that was not true and rejected a reduced-time plea deal. In the case of Galin Frye, who had been popped for fourth time for while driving with a revoked license, Frye's lawyer simply did not inform him that a plea deal was on the table, which prompted Frye to plead guilty to the charge and ignore the deal. "Plea bargains have become so central to today's criminal justice system that defense counsel must meet responsibilities in the plea bargain process to render the adequate assistance of counsel that the Sixth Amendment requires at critical stages of the criminal process," Kennedy wrote.

You can read the Frye opinion here.

Read the Lafler opinion here.