Document: 538 U.S. 500 MASSAROv.UNITED STATES. No. 01-1559. Supreme Court of United States. Argued February 25, 2003. Decided April 23, Petitioner Massaro was indicted on federal racketeering charges in connection with a murder. The day before his trial began, prosecutors learned bullet allegedly recovered from the car which victim's body found, but did not inform defense counsel until underway. Defense more than once declined court's offer continuance so could be examined. convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment. On direct appeal new argued that District had erred admitting evidence, raise an ineffective-assistance-of-trial-counsel claim. Second Circuit affirmed. later moved vacate conviction under 28 U. S. C. § 2255, claiming, as relevant here, rendered ineffective assistance failing accept continuance. found claim procedurally defaulted because he have raised it appeal. In affirming, adhered its precedent that, when defendant is represented by ineffective-assistance based solely record, must appeal; failure do results procedural default unless petitioner shows cause prejudice. Held: An ineffective-assistance-of-counsel may brought collateral proceeding whether or Requiring criminal bring claims does promote rule's objectives: conserving judicial resources respecting law's important interest finality judgments. Applying rule would create risk defendants feel compelled issue there has been opportunity fully develop claim's factual predicate, for first time forum best suited assess those facts, even if record contains some indication deficiencies counsel's performance. A 2255 motion preferable deciding When appeal, appellate court proceed developed precisely for, therefore often incomplete inadequate purpose litigating preserving claiming show actions were supported reasonable strategy error prejudicial. Strickland v. Washington, 466 668. evidence introduced at trial, however, will devoted guilt innocence issues, resulting disclose facts necessary decide either prong analysis. Under announced ordinarily litigated instance district court, developing determining adequacy representation during entire trial. take testimony witnesses prosecution alleged deficient addition, ruled upon judge who presided should advantageous perspective effectiveness conduct any This hold reserved review, cases ineffectiveness apparent obvious addressed sua sponte. such cases, certain questions arise subsequent proceedings concerning conclusiveness determinations made these implementation matters are Court. Pp. 504-509. 27 Fed. Appx. 26, reversed remanded. KENNEDY, J., delivered opinion unanimous CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR SECOND CIRCUIT. Herald Price Fahringer petitioner. With him briefs Erica T. Dubno Eugene Gressman. Sri Srinivasan brief Solicitor General Olson, Assistant Attorney Chertoff, Deputy Dreeben, Steven L. Lane.* JUSTICE KENNEDY 1 Petitioner, Joseph Massaro, charges, including murder aid racketeering, 18 1962(d), shooting death Fiorito. He tried States Southern New York. Massaro's begin, what appeared critical piece evidence: found. They waited several days, this development. Not underway opening statement they make disclosure. After informed development still course 2 relating counsel. Appeals affirmed conviction. Judgt. order reported 57 F. 3d 1063 (1995). 3 filed seeking As claimed grant York 4 26 acknowledged usually excused procedural-default rules attorney handles both unlikely against himself. Nevertheless, decision Billy-Eko States, 8 111 (1993). Billy-Eko, Finding evident failed prejudice, held barred bringing review. 5 We granted certiorari. 536 990 (2002). now urges us need basis record. Federal Courts conflict question, Seventh joining Circuit, see Guinan 6 468 (CA7 1993), 10 other taking position no see, e. g., Cofske, 157 1, (CA1 1998), cert. denied, 526 1059 (1999); Jake, 281 123, 132, n. 7 (CA3 2002); King, 119 290, 295 (CA4 1997); Rivas, 364, 369 (CA5 1998); Neuhausser, 241 460, 474 (CA6), 534 879 (2001); Evans, 272 1069, 1093 (CA8 2001), 535 1029 (2002); Rewald, 889 2d 836, 859 (CA9 1989), 498 819 (1990); Galloway, 56 1239, 1240 (CA10 1995) (en banc); Griffin, 699 1102, 1107-1109 (CA11 1983); Richardson, 167 621, 626 (CADC), 528 895 (1999). agree majority Appeals, we reverse. background our discussion general review See Frady, 456 152, 167-168 (1982); Bousley 523 614, 621-622 (1998). neither statutory nor constitutional requirement, doctrine courts conserve respect conclude requiring objectives. Judge Easterbrook noted, "[r]ules procedure designed induce litigants present their contentions right tribunal time." Guinan, supra, (concurring opinion). usual opposite effect, creating predicate Furthermore, facts. better-reasoned approach permit timely 2255. light way system developed, most assistance. object thus purpose. 668 (1984), issues innocence, many If one commission, reflect action taken reasons it. knowing seemingly unusual misguided sound strategic motive alternatives worse. 473 (Easterbrook, concurring) ("No matter how odd performance seem, lawyer reason acting did.... Or turn out overall sufficient despite glaring omission ..."). contain errors omission, much less underlying them. And conflicts might only attorney-client correspondence documents typical introduced. See, 114. Without additional development, moreover, able ascertain 9 adopt today, 2d, 1109 (In proceeding, "has full prove establishing counsel, government contrary, hears spoken words can print sees expressions never bearing created"); Beaulieu 930 805 1991) (partially rev'd grounds, 1239 1995). same judge, having observed earlier Circuit's creates inefficiencies proceeding. puts into awkward vis-à-vis Appellate becoming familiar lengthy short deadline, unwilling help familiarize himself understanding reflects own incompetence. 11 Subjecting cause-and-prejudice also perverse incentives To ensure potential waived — avoid incurring stage pressured regardless merit. 12 Even meritorious fail support waste attempting address meritless though colorable, handled efficiently 1241 ("threat ... bar doubtless resulted being asserted protect unnecessarily burden[ing] parties concern far speculative. applying claims, urged "err side inclusion appeal," 3d, 116. 13 inefficiencies. determine "new." Questions arise, example, about retained different lawyers law office handle habeas engage painstaking clear allowing contrast, eliminate requirements. Although "require judges search needles haystacks seek rare deem waived," 475 wisdom spend exercises instances, produce benefit. It better use allow merits. 14 said speed resolution claims. For discussed, think few capable benefit resolution. benefits instances outweighed increased burden impose where forced analysis turning rule, earliest contemporaneous objection raising place. 15 growing state follow today. Pennsylvania recently changed "a longer considered related prior ineffectiveness." Commonwealth Grant, 572 Pa. 48, 67, 813 A. 726, 738 id., 62-67, 13, 735-738, (cataloging States' case adopting position). 16 Government took previous arguing Cronic, 648, 667, 42 (1984). go far. There consider advisable too, us. later, appropriate 17 judgment reversed, remanded further consistent opinion. ordered. Notes: * David Lewis M. Porter National Association Criminal Lawyers et al. amici curiae urging reversal.

Category: 0