Court-Martial Trial Practice Blog
SCOTUSBlog has the 3 June 2010 petitions to watch at SCOTUS. Here is an interesting one.
Title: Jones v. Williams
Docket: 09-948
Issue: Whether the Tenth Circuit violated 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1) by granting habeas relief for ineffective assistance of counsel during plea bargain negotiations to a defendant who was later convicted and sentenced in a fair trial, on the ground that the remedy the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals gave to the defendant was constitutionally inadequate, given that the Supreme Court has not clearly established what remedy, if any, is appropriate for ineffective assistance of counsel in such a case.
- Opinion below (10th Circuit, rehearing denied)
- Petition for certiorari
- Brief in opposition
- Petitioner’s reply
The relevant “facts.”
Pity Oklahoma doesn’t have the CCA’s awesome powers of de novo review.
I don’t think the defense counsel’s belief in the client’s innocence is the deciding factor, is it? The question is based on the likely evidence admissible at trial can the prosecution prove the case and get a conviction. Regardless of your own belief in the client’s innocence the weight of the likely evidence and the client’s desires come first?