Document: 475 U.S. 157 106 S.Ct. 988 89 L.Ed.2d 123 Crispus NIX, Warden, Petitionerv.Emanuel Charles WHITESIDE. No. 84-1321. Argued Nov. 5, 1985. Decided Feb. 26, 1986. Syllabus In preparing for his Iowa state-court trial on a murder charge, respondent consistently told attorney that although he had not actually seen gun in the victim's hand when stabbed victim, was convinced victim gun. Respondent's companions who were present during stabbing counsel they gun, and no found. Counsel advised existence of necessary to establish claim self-defense, only reasonable belief nearby even though present. However, preparation direct examination shortly before trial, first time "something metallic" hand. When asked about this, said: "If I don't say saw I'm dead." On respondent's insisting would testify metallic," him if testified falsely, it be counsel's duty advise court felt committing perjury, probably allowed impeach testimony seek withdraw from representation insisted perjury. Respondent ultimately as originally contemplated, admitting cross-examination After jury found guilty, moved new claiming been deprived fair by admonitions state or metallic." The denied motion after hearing, Supreme Court affirmed conviction, holding actions permissible, but required under law. then sought federal habeas corpus relief, alleging effective assistance attorney's refusal allow proposed. District Appeals reversed, concluding an intent commit communicated counsel, does alter defendant's right threatened violation client's confidences violated "effective representation" standards set forth Strickland v. Washington, 466 668, 104 2052, 80 674. Held: Sixth Amendment criminal defendant is refuses cooperate with presenting perjured at trial. Pp. 164-176. (a) supra, held obtain relief way deprivation Amendment, movant must both serious error prejudice. inquiry into whether conduct "reasonably effective." A careful narrow wide range acceptable so restrictively constitutionalize particular professional thereby intrude state's proper authority define apply applicable those admits practice its courts. 164-166. (b) Counsel's here fell within responses client perjury Amendment. loyalty to, advocacy of, cause limited legitimate, lawful compatible very nature search truth. Although take all means attain objectives, precluded taking steps any assisting false evidence otherwise violating Moreover, accepted norms require lawyer disclose frauds upon court. Iowa's Code also expressly permits withdrawal appropriate response threatens 166-171. (c) Appeals' supported record since action, most, contemplated Whatever scope constitutional testify, elementary such extend testifying includes have will planned There breach admonition 171-175. (d) As matter law, cannot prejudice inquiry. "conflict interests" involved one imposed proposal crime fabricating testimony. This kind conflict interest render constitutionally infirm. 175-176. 744 F.2d 1323 (CA 8 1984), reversed. BURGER, C.J., delivered opinion Court, which WHITE, POWELL, REHNQUIST, O'CONNOR, JJ., joined. BRENNAN, J., filed concurring judgment, post, p. 176. BLACKMUN, MARSHALL, STEVENS, joined, 177. 190. Brent R. Appel, Des Moines, Iowa, petitioner. Patrick Reilly Grady, respondent. Chief Justice BURGER Court. 1 We granted certiorari decide trial.1 2 * A. 3 Whiteside convicted second-degree verdict killing took place February 8, 1977, Cedar Rapids, Iowa. two others went Calvin Love's apartment late night, seeking marihuana. Love bed arrived; argument between over marihuana ensued. At point, directed girlfriend get "piece," another point got up, returned bed. According Whiteside's testimony, started reach pillow toward Whiteside. chest, inflicting fatal wound. 4 charged murder, appointed objected initially appointed, uncomfortable formerly prosecutor. Gary L. Robinson immediately began investigation. gave statement latter "was pulling pistol underneath bed." Upon questioning Robinson, however, indicated No premises; police following stabbing, revealed weapon, family removed possessions apartment. interviewed none incident. 5 Until stated About week examination, associate Donna Paulsen something "metallic" responded: 6 "[I]n Howard Cook's case there If 7 repeated prove available reasonably believed danger. him, according Robinson's testimony: "[W]e could [testify falsely] because officers we suborning do it; . did my what doing perjury; also, attempt testimony." App. Pet. Cert. A-85. 9 perjury.2 10 own defense "knew" reaching acted swiftly self-defense. cross-examination, admitted presented sawed-off shotgun other occasions, may careless, everything crime. this show basis asserted fear 11 heard motion. made specific findings facts related Robinson. 12 conviction. State Whiteside, 272 N.W.2d 468 (1978). That defenses using Relying DR 7-102(A)(4) Professional Responsibility Lawyers, prohibits § 721.2 (now 720.3 (1985)), criminalizes subornation concluded required. commended "both Mr. Ms. high ethical manner handled." B 13 petitioned writ United States Southern petition alleged writ. Accepting court's factual finding intended perjurious, grounds defense. 14 Eighth Circuit reversed granted. Scurr, (1984). judge, good falsely acknowledged Harris New York, 401 222, 91 643, 28 (1971), privilege behalf include Nevertheless, reasoned inform constituted threat violate preserve confidences.3 Appeals, breached down 674 requirement satisfied implication duties. rehearing en banc denied, Judges Gibson, Ross, Fagg, Bowman dissenting. 750 713 certiorari, 471 1014, 105 2016, 85 298 (1985), reverse. II 15 accused relatively recent origin. part preceding century, defendants country, common considered disqualified giving sworn their reason party case. See, e.g., Ferguson Georgia, 365 570, 81 756, 783 (1961); Morris, Studies History American Law 59-60 (2d ed. 1959). among states adhered rule disqualification. Laffer, 38 422 (1874). 16 By end 19th disqualification finally abolished statute most Act Mar. 16, 1878, ch. 37, 20 Stat. 30-31; see Thayer, Chapter Legal Massachusetts, Harv.L.Rev. 1, (1895). has never explicitly due process behalf, cases several Circuits held, long assumed. Curtis, 742 1070, 1076 (CA7 1984); Bifield, 702 342, 349 (CA2), cert. 461 931, 103 2095, 77 304 (1983). suggested exists corollary Fifth against compelled U.S., 225, S.Ct., 645. See Ferguson, 598-601, 771-773 (concurring Frankfurter, J.); id., 601-603, 772-773 Clark, J.). 17 To error, established rendered deficient "counsel errors functioning 'counsel' guaranteed Amendment." Strickland, 687, 2064. prejudice, claimed lapses performance unfair "undermine confidence outcome" Id., 694, 2068. 18 problem arise. Rather, counteract natural tendency fault unsuccessful defense, reviewing ineffective "indulge strong presumption falls assistance." 689, 2066. shape perimeters assistance, mandates 19 "[p]revailing reflected Bar Association Standards like, are guides determining reasonable, guides." 688, 2065. Under standard, standard necessarily make out denial guarantee counsel. examining conduct, some future challenging course need greater precision weight given recognized canons ethics, statutes codes, defining limits conduct. Here face question, virtually sources speak voice. C 21 turn next question presented: definition "reasonable professional" informs perjure himself stand. determine whether, setting, 22 "overarching advocate cause." Ibid. Plainly, objectives client, principle unequivocal terms expositors Canons Ethics adopted 1908. 1908 Canon 32 provided: 23 "No corporate individual, however powerful, nor cause, civil political, important, entitled receive should service advice involving disloyalty law whose ministers are, disrespect judicial office, bound uphold, corruption person persons exercising public office private trust, deception betrayal public. He observe ." Of course, more than articulate centuries Similarly, 1928, acknowledges exception confidentiality announced intention crime: 24 "The included [the attorney] respect." 25 These principles carried through contemporary codifications4 responsibility. Disciplinary Rule 7-102 Model (1980), "Representing Client Within Bounds Law," provides: 26 "(A) shall not: 27 "(4) Knowingly use evidence. 29 30 "(7) assist knows illegal fraudulent." provision binding lawyers appear Lawyers (1985). Rules Conduct (1983) similarly admonish attorneys obey laws representing client: 31 "RULE 1.2 Scope Representation 33 "(d) engage, fraudulent. 34 Both adopt attorney-client disclosure intends committed. 4-101(C)(3) (intention crime); 3.3 (lawyer falsity compromises confidences). Indeed, merely authorize disclosure. 3.3(a)(4); 7-102(B)(1); Committee Assn. Crary, 245 (Iowa 1976). 35 confirm legal profession advance interests equally solemn comply conduct; specifically ensures evidence.5 special prevent derives recognition much tampering witnesses jurors promises threats, undermines administration justice. W. Burdick, Crime §§ 293, 300, 318-336 (1946). 36 offense 475, felony statute, including 720.2 generally C. Torcia, Wharton's Criminal 631 (14th 1981). An aids witness perjurious can anticipated risks prosecution 37 It universally agreed minimum confronted dissuade unlawful Conduct, 3.3, Comment; Wolfram, Perjury, 50 S.Cal.L.Rev. 809, 846 (1977). directly commentary heading "False Evidence": "When offered arise lawyer's keep revelations confidential candor ascertaining material false, persuade or, offered, character disclosed." Comment (emphasis added). 39 thus suggests revelation professionally responsible commentary, well permit 1.16(a)(1), 1.6, (1983); Responsibility, 2-110(B), (C) (1980). Withdrawal situation arises gives rise many difficult questions possible mistrial claims double jeopardy.6 40 essence brief amicus practices circumstance either passively tolerate This, consistent governance called "a truth." suggestion sometimes believe judge him" sense honorably give aid known D 41 Considering light these discern failure adhere Whether successful "threat" scheme, Strickland. 42 assumed purpose decision intervened; denying states: 43 presume appellant falsely. 44 45 ". prevented [Whiteside] hold action 46 47 "Counsel's impermissibly compromised appellant's conditioning continued restricted F.2d, 714-715. 48 While purporting follow highest "on law," F.2d., 1330, reached conclusions 49 "action counsel" Nothing undermined support "also [Whiteside's] fact shows contrary: "restricted" restrained aided developing divulged communications until post-trial challenge quality performance. successfully dissuaded Paradoxically, while accepting conclusion proposed act, efforts improper, first, forcing impermissible choice testify; and, second, compromising perjury.7 51 "in refuse so" hold: 52 "[T]hat construed Knox, 396 [90 363, 275] (1969); cf. Dennis States, 384 855 [86 1840, 973] (1966). Having voluntarily taken stand, petitioner obligation truthfully. 53 impeached prior contrary statements ruled inadmissible Miranda Arizona, 436, 86 1602, 694 crystal clear whatever—constitutional otherwise—for Havens, 446 620, 626-627, 100 1912, 1916-1917, 64 559 54 paucity subject "right" explained notion responsibly advanced; risk disciplinary proceedings, suspension disbarment. 55 said forced permissible For truthfully, withdraw, deprives neither "when truthfully suffer consequences." 626, 1916. proposes resort produce evidence, consequence 56 record, enjoyed bounds exercise presentation setting indistinguishable substance threatening juror. informed arranging bribe threaten members insist silence. advising confidentiality, totally covers admission guilt, plans engage Clark 289 15, 465, 469, L.Ed. 993 (1933). short, responsibility lawyer, officer key component system justice, dedicated truth, essentially same announces procure justice worthy name lesser standard. 57 seemingly remain silent committed wholly incompatible promulgated State. position advocated petitioner, contrary, overwhelming majority courts,8 codes ethics. Since duty, follows E 58 that, complained second strand likely altered outcome order "there probability unprofessional errors, result proceeding different." "[a] sufficient undermine outcome." noted "benchmark" ineffective-assistance fairness adversary proceeding, judging likelihood different outcome, entitlement luck lawless decisionmaker." 695, 59 persuaded desist valid diminished desisting Even assume might prejudiced. 60 evade relies conflicting loyalties Cuyler Sullivan, 335, 1708, 333 without pointing prejudicial default provided "actively represent[ing] interests." 350, 1719. 61 Here, indeed "conflict," quite kind; which, put it, "I'm remotely dealt Sullivan. suggest multiple representations resulted active rendering "conflict" prejudicially ineffective, every guilty criminal's conviction suspect acquittal means. Can anyone doubt problems spawned volumes litigation generate? 62 treated accord standards, truthful prejudiced issuance 63 Reversed. judgment. 65 rules practicing Nor enjoy statutory grant jurisdiction 66 Accordingly, surprising emphasizes "must courts." Ante, 165. read saying tell how behave courts, unless rights violated. 67 Unfortunately, seems unable resist temptation sharing community vision But let mistake: Court's essay regarding constitutes correct pure discourse force BLACKMUN observes, issue thorny one, 177-178, judges, bar associations, students, understand now "decided." 68 join BLACKMUN's concurrence agree failed 69 whom STEVENS join, 70 How ought act faced controversial issue.1 vehicle attempting resolve problem. argues properly meant guarantee. suffered injury justifying concur 71 7, Emmanual death. bedroom, where occurred, "[v]ery dark," 48, attack weapon: 72 "Q. Did you think gun? 73 "A. Most definitely thought that. 74 Why that? 75 Because Calvin's reputation, brother's conversation had, didn't And girl friend piece, couldn't retreat." 50. 76 room dark, "piece" (which referred weapon). 17-18, 20, 36-37, 42-45. ever first-degree sentenced years' imprisonment. contending court-appointed attorneys, Paulsen, improperly coerced fact. 78 evidentiary hearing motion, meeting weapon Some weeks later, rather one. "got impression maybe go along with—with happening, being involved, pull trial." A70. 79 contradicted Whiteside's. Roughly "made reference seeing 'metallic'. gun." A85: "And mentioned her myself. His was, 'in dead.' physically one; two, .; three, four, lie happened, them us, self-defense us." stronger found, "we tried create gun," people carrying stipulation possession suggestions State's initial too cursory discover thorough, search. A87-A88. 82 rejected "find[ing] Robinson." 57. affirmed. 83 parties rest proceedings. Judge Stuart judge's having fairly correctness. U.S.C. 2254(d). himself, A41. 84 behaved ethically,2 1330. view, obligations zealous addition, limiting (1984), normally demonstrate behavior unreasonable behavior. Washington "limited" burdened actual adversely affects performance, 692, 2067, quoting 348, 1718, 1719, shown conflicted wishes, affected "undermin[ing] fundamental trust client" representation. Petitioner's vote 4. (CA8 1984). dissent, John joined Bowman, argued cognizable Sullivan inapposite, making untenable assumption possessed adverse effect fully permitted wished. 87 separate dissent addressed prong simply viewed creating interest; full trial; warning "strident," 718, understood. 88 "I find Robinson" "would hand." A42. correctness 2254(d), overcome. attempted rebut factfinding procedure employed considering motions provide motion.3 large assumes Brief 10-11, contends, written 55, knowledge conclude going mixed apply. 90 Neither contention overcomes finding. First, implicit credit prepared alone again A78-A79. Second, accorded courts below "proposed [have been] deliberately untruthful." N.W.2d, 471. lower purport concerning identifies—whether approaches performance-and-prejudice requires us "the [the] assistance," ante, 165, contemplates course: 92 "Although discussed ineffectiveness component, deciding approach address components makes insufficient showing particular, deficiencies. easier dispose ground lack expect often so, followed." 697, 2069-2070. 93 Hill Lockhart, 474 52, 60, 366, 371, 203 case, legally Nor, below, presumed. 94 touchstone allegation "to deprive reliable." hand.4 Thus, ask refrained 95 ago noted: "All relevant war judgment resting Therefore tends defeat sole ultimate objective re Michael, 326 224, 227, 78, 79, (1945). prosecutorial "consistently obtained knowing fundamentally unfair, aside jury" (footnote omitted). Agurs, 427 97, 103, 96 2392, 2397, 342 (1976). Napue Illinois, 360 264, 269, 1173, 1177, 1217 (1959); Pyle Kansas, 317 213, 216, 177, 178, 214 (1942); Mooney Holohan, 294 112, 340, 341, 791 (1935). antithetical our introduce combat it. (1980); Oregon Hass, 420 714, 720-723, 1215, 1220-1221, 570 (1975); 225-226, 645-646, (1971); Walder 347 62, 65, 354, 356, 98 503 (1954). proposition contribute (or withholding detract from) reliability untenable. true juries acquitted convicted, based decisions acquit lied Double Jeopardy Clause bars reprosecution defendants, occasion prosecuted Williams, 341 58, 63-65, 595, 598-599, 747 (1951). "cannot perjury." 645.5 extent rests assertion able recognize. "A decisionmaker, reviewed." designed 97 erred labored " 'an [that] performance,' 1718. existed. already why help identified plan 298, 306 convictions conflicts infringed legitimate vigorous protection rights. Wood 450 261, 268-271, 101 1097, 1101-1103, 220 (1981) (defense paid defendants' employer pursued employer's litigating test obtaining leniency clients cooperating prosecution); Glasser 315 72-75, 457, 465-467, 680 (1942) simultaneously represented object certain potentially cross-examine apparent minimize codefendant's guilt). suborn Responsibility. entirely best interest. risked prosecution. eyewitnesses impeachment, premeditation murder. lied, account sentence. Grayson, 438 41, 52-54, 2610, 2616-2618, 582 (1978).6 dangers, dissuading comported responsibility.7 poses danger values loyal embodied therefore unwarranted. 99 "grade performance." 2070. counsel; conformed code sees violates depend factors: stage proceedings discovers plan, ways just three. complex interaction factors, vary inappropriate blanket reveal, Except rarest cases, role facts," ex rel. Wilcox Johnson, 555 115, 122 (CA3 1977), pose depriving Amendment.8 am troubled adoption 168-171. compelling integrity trials justify regulating length acquittal. Association's curiae govern responsibilities wrong audience. themselves extends ensuring restrictions enacts infringe joint amici maintain "differing approaches" question. Indiana et al. Amici Curiae 5. signal merit asking inquiring avoids unnecessary interference regulation bar. effect, relief. 102 Holmes taught word skin living thought. "fact" life own. From perspective appellate sifted piece small diamond. deal mixtures sand clay. pebble enough glance hue handful gravel. view appears perfectly knew duty—both ruin meritorious case—to extreme measures occurring. unanimous remote perspective, pellucidly "legally prejudice." beneath surface areas uncertainty resolved today. certainty change recollection harbinger perjury—as review certainty—should tempered realization reflection, honest recall sincerely recalls) details previously overlooked. pretrial expose yet committed—and, indeed, threat—is out. convinced—as am—that confronting must, should, believe. answer colored circumstances attending event aftermath. preserved day, imply criticism condemn Courts varying insistence Seventh Circuit, example, call infirm 1070 Third alibi perjured. 115 Lowery Cardwell, 575 727 (CA9 1978) (withdrawal request middle bench testimony). version events considerably cryptic: questions, come regard weapon? couldn't—I conflict. A-70. exhausted pressed exhausted, further futile. currently exist codifications uniform 1969, subsequently (in modification) nearly state. 1983. promulgation Association, States: Arkansas, Delaware, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, Hampshire, Jersey, North Carolina, Washington. ABA/BNA Lawyers' Manual 334 (1984-1985) (New Jersey); 445 (Arizona); (Montana, Minnesota); 924 (Missouri); 961 (Delaware, Washington); 1026 (North Carolina); 1127 (Arkansas); (1986) Nevada). form Rules. supports referring history promulgated. preamble current recognizes choices confront sensitive concurrent duties system: "Within framework issues discretion Such moral guided basic underlying Rules." Preamble, evolution early draft reflects compromise suggesting raise holding, option stand decline affirmatively traditional examination. Instead, mute undertook narrative words unaided least presiding disassociate course. Additionally, discuss closing arguments. ABA Justice, Proposed Standard 4-7.7 1980). treating rigorous see, McKissick 379 754 (CA5 1967); Dodd Florida Bar, 118 So.2d 17, (Fla.1960). Ninth expressed approval "free narrative" standards. 1323, 1331 1978). rejects participation passive whatever allowing challenge. determined client. acting admonished withdrew "probably testimony," true. 1976); 290 N.C. 56, 224 S.E.2d 174 (1976); Thornton 357 A.2d 429 (D.C.1976); Henderson, 205 Kan. 231, P.2d 136 (1970); King, Utah 2d 258, 322 1095 (1958); Carroll, 244 S.W.2d (Ky.1951); Hinds Cal.2d 87, 119 134 (1941). Contra, 1984) (case below); Callan & David, Duty Confidentiality: Disclosure Misconduct Adversary System, Rutgers L.Rev. 332 Rieger, Perjury: Resolution Constitutional Ethical Issues, Minn.L.Rev. 121 (1985); compare, Freedman, Defense Lawyer: Three Hardest Questions, Mich.L.Rev. 1469 (1966), 1980) (approved Standing submitted House Delegates), Noonan, Purposes Advocacy Limits Confidentiality, 1485 comment, 66-67 stated: "That governed solely authoritatively interpreted last species law." declined condoned rested recantation witness' believable: recantation, whole matters Premised thereon, believes [post conviction] deny liberty shift shoulders truth matter." Compiano, 261 509, 517, 154 845, 849 (1967). Taylor, 287 576, 578 1980); McGhee, 280 442 1979), 444 1039, 712, 327 106, 110-111, 464, 465-466, 562 reveal effects Cf. 1977) (finding purported caused all). beyond claim, confess somewhat puzzled remains open 164. (1961), issue. 572, n. 758, 1. then, repeatedly right. Jones Barnes, 463 745, 751, 3308, 3312, 987 (the "ultimate [such as] behalf"); Brooks Tennessee, 406 605, 612, 1891, 1895, 358 (1972) ("Whether important tactical right"); York. imagine prohibited Fourteenth Amendments, as, perhaps, Fifth. fact, apparently impose sentence years, Tr. (Aug. imprisonment instead. assistance. continuing former information received defendant, zealously. Lowenthal, Successive Yale L.J. comparison illustrative. detail factors led false. 38-39, 43, (July 29, 1977). "good cause" "strong support" conclusion. 468, credence parts implausible unsubstantiated, clearly 52-53 contrast, Wilcox, she all, "no indicating himself," characterized beliefs "private conjectures guilt innocence [her] client." 122.

Category: 0