U.S. Supreme Court 06-06-11
From OCDLA Library of Defense
< Blog:Case Reviews(Difference between revisions)
by: Grapkoch • June 5, 2011 • no comments
(Importing text file) |
(Importing text file) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | Read the full article for details about the following new cases: | + | ''Read the full article for details about the following new cases:'' |
| − | * | + | * A Right to Effective Assistance of PCR Counsel? |
| − | + | In a fairly exciting development, the Supreme Court announced today that is was accepting certiorari in the case of ''[http://sblog.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Martinez-CA9-Opinion.pdf Martinez v. Ryan]'', which asks | |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | <blockquote> | |
| − | + | ''whether a defendant in a state criminal case who is prohibited by state law from raising on direct appeal any claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel, but who has a state-law right to raise such a claim in a first post-conviction proceeding, has a federal constitutional right to effective assistance of first post-conviction counsel specifically with respect to his ineffective-assistance-of-trial-counsel claim.'' | |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | </blockquote> | |
| − | [http://www. | + | In the opinion below, the Ninth Circuit answered in the negative: "We have already concluded that there is no right to the assistance of post-conviction counsel in connection with a state petition for post-conviction relief, such as Martinez asserts in this case. Without a right to the appointment of counsel, there can be no right to the effective assistance of counsel." So, next term we'll likely get a chance to see if the Supremes agree with that proposition. |
| + | |||
| + | More information can be found at the SCOTUSblog case page, [http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/martinez-v-ryan/ available here]. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ''[http://sblog.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Martinez-CA9-Opinion.pdf Martinez v. Ryan]'' | ||
{{wl-publish: 2011-06-05 21:00:00 -0700 | grapkoch }} | {{wl-publish: 2011-06-05 21:00:00 -0700 | grapkoch }} | ||
Latest revision as of 19:02, December 21, 2012
Read the full article for details about the following new cases:
- A Right to Effective Assistance of PCR Counsel?
In a fairly exciting development, the Supreme Court announced today that is was accepting certiorari in the case of Martinez v. Ryan, which asks
whether a defendant in a state criminal case who is prohibited by state law from raising on direct appeal any claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel, but who has a state-law right to raise such a claim in a first post-conviction proceeding, has a federal constitutional right to effective assistance of first post-conviction counsel specifically with respect to his ineffective-assistance-of-trial-counsel claim.
In the opinion below, the Ninth Circuit answered in the negative: "We have already concluded that there is no right to the assistance of post-conviction counsel in connection with a state petition for post-conviction relief, such as Martinez asserts in this case. Without a right to the appointment of counsel, there can be no right to the effective assistance of counsel." So, next term we'll likely get a chance to see if the Supremes agree with that proposition.
More information can be found at the SCOTUSblog case page, available here.
