U.S. Supreme Court
Supreme Court Accepts Case Blaming Lawyer for Bad Insanity Plea Advice
Posted Jun 27, 2008, 11:19 am CDT
By Debra Cassens Weiss
The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case in which an inmate convicted of murder claims his lawyer improperly advised him to withdraw an insanity plea.
The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found the advice violated standards of professional conduct because it was the only affirmative defense, SCOTUSblog reports. The appeals court ordered a new trial for the defendant, Alexandre Mirzayance, even though state court rulings had affirmed the conviction, the Associated Press reports.
The cert petition (PDF posted by SCOTUSblog) asked whether the 9th Circuit exceeded its authority by failing to defer to state court rulings, and whether a federal court can substitute its own factual findings for those of a district court without determining they were clearly erroneous.
SCOTUSblog says the Supreme Court may want to clarify points about the lawyer’s defense, or it may want to consider whether the appeals court properly reconsidered the case after the Supreme Court ordered it remanded in 2007 for another look.
The case is Knowles v. Mirzayance.
Related Stories
- Even Routine Law Practice is Difficult and Dangerous in Russia
-1 years, 12 months ago - Border Town Becomes Murder Capital, While Mexico Pushes for Rule-of-Law Changes
Jul 4, 2009, 10:00 am CDT - Counsel for Accused Lawyer Must Be Given Control of Claimed Child Porn
Jul 2, 2009, 03:52 pm CDT - Federal Judge Plans to Acquit Mom Convicted in Landmark Cyberbullying Case
Jul 2, 2009, 02:40 pm CDT
Add Comment
We welcome your comments, but please adhere to our comment policy.