U.S. Supreme Court
Supreme Court Accepts Case Blaming Lawyer for Bad Insanity Plea Advice
Posted Jun 27, 2008, 10:19 am CST
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
- Bush and Pardon Recipients Share Trait: They’re Supporters of Right to Bear Arms
39 minutes ago - ABA Ethics Opinion Warns of Issues Raised by Law Firm Ethics Counsel
3 hours, 7 minutes ago - Sanction Upheld for Lawyer who Told Client of Trade Secret in Public Court File
7 hours, 20 minutes ago - Jurors Clear Lori Drew of Felonies in Landmark Cyberbullying Trial
Nov 26, 2008, 02:38 pm CST
Commenting has expired on this post.
Comments
Be the first to comment.