Document: 481 U.S. 551 107 S.Ct. 1990 95 L.Ed.2d 539 PENNSYLVANIA, Petitionerv.Dorothy FINLEY. No. 85-2099. Argued March 2, 1987. Decided May 18, Syllabus Respondent was convicted of second-degree murder and sentenced to life imprisonment in a Pennsylvania trial court, the Supreme Court affirmed on direct appeal. In respondent's subsequent postconviction proceedings, as required by state law, appointed counsel assist her. Counsel reviewed record; consulted with respondent; concluded that there were no arguable bases for collateral review; advised court writing his conclusion; requested permission withdraw. After reviewing record, agreed arguably meritorious issues dismissed proceedings. acquired new appealed Superior Court, which counsel's conduct violated constitutional rights, remanded case further The relied Anders v. California, 386 738, 87 1396, 18 493, held (1) when an attorney represent indigent defendant appeal finds be wholly frivolous he must request court's withdraw submit brief referring anything record supporting appeal, (2) copy furnished time allowed him raise any points chooses, (3) itself then decide whether is frivolous. Held: below improperly Federal Constitution extend procedures these Denial indigents first right amounts discrimination against poor violation Fourteenth Amendment, established prophylactic framework relevant when, only litigant has previously counsel. extends right, since federal pursuing discretionary review conviction, Ross Moffitt, 417 600, 94 2437, 41 341, fortiori, such attacking, conviction become final upon exhaustion appellate process. do not apply state-created just because they are applied right. Respondent's access lawyer result State's decision, command Constitution. followed her proceedings fully comported fundamental fairness mandated Due Process Clause. States have obligation provide relief, do, Clause does require State supply well. Nor equal protection guarantee meaningful this case. Moreover, merit contention once granted prisoner review, Amendment requires actions comport procedures. Evitts Lucey, 469 387, 105 830, 83 821, distinguished. made valid choice give prisoners assistance without requiring full panoply procedural protections given defendants who fundamentally different position—at Pp. 554-559. 330 Pa.Super. 313, 479 A.2d 568 (1984), reversed remanded. REHNQUIST, C.J., delivered opinion WHITE, POWELL, O'CONNOR, SCALIA, JJ., joined. BLACKMUN, J., filed concurring judgment, post, p. ----. BRENNAN, dissenting opinion, MARSHALL, joined, STEVENS, Gaele M. Barthold, Philadelphia, Pa., petitioner. Catherine Harper, respondent. Chief Justice REHNQUIST Court. 1 1975 respondent Common Pleas Philadelphia County. She imprisonment. Her Pennsylvania. That unanimously conviction. 477 Pa. 211, 383 898 (1978). Having failed respondent, proceeding pro se, sought relief from under Post Conviction Hearing Act. See 42 Pa.Cons.Stat. § 9541 et seq. (1982). raised same had rejected merits. denied but reversed, holding entitled, 497 332, 440 1183 (1981). On remand, He relief. Accordingly, conclusion conducted independent even meritorious. thus petition 2 pursued Over dissent, rights. (1984). "Pennsylvania law concerning court-appointed sees basis derived seminal of" 493 (1967). Pa.Super., at 318, A.2d, 570. Anders, frivolous: 3 "[H]e should so advise must, however, accompanied might support A chooses; court—not counsel—then proceeds, after examination all frivolous." U.S., 744, S.Ct., 1400. 4 follow procedures, it therefore We certiorari, 812, 61, 93 20 (1986), we now reverse. 5 think United based underlying Douglas 372 353, 814, 9 811 (1963). Relying "that equality demanded Amendment," id., 358, 817, denial amounted unconstitutional poor. order protect "constitutional requirement substantial fair process" set out Douglas, described above appears Of course, did down lawyers, particular Rather, 6 never mounting attacks their convictions, see Johnson Avery, 393 483, 488, 89 747, 750, 21 718 (1969), decline hold today. Our cases establish further. Thus, suggestions appeals. Wainwright Torna, 455 586, 102 1300, 71 475 (1982); 341 (1974). attacking long Boyd Dutton, 405 1, 7, n. 92 759, 762, 30 755 (1972) (POWELL, dissenting). 7 supra, analyzed defendant's claim two theories. exacted appointment counsel: 8 "[I]t ordinarily defendant, rather than State, initiates process, seeking fend off efforts prosecutor overturn finding guilt judge or jury below. needs shield being 'haled into court' stripped presumption innocence, sword upset prior determination guilt. This difference significant for, while one would agree may simply dispense stage criminal consent, clear need all. McKane Durston, 153 684 [14 913, 38 L.Ed. 867] (1894). fact been provided automatically mean acts unfairly refusing every way." 610-611, 2444. also appellant affluent retain one. "The duty our duplicate legal arsenal privately retained continuing effort reverse assure adequate opportunity present claims fairly context process." Id., 616, 2447. 10 These considerations more force review. First, reject argument Douglas. apparently believes "right counsel" can meaning, matter what source But afforded some form end inquiry purposes. lawyer's assistance, combined nature controls question. case, 11 analysis forecloses claim. habeas fairness. Postconviction removed It part itself, considered civil nature. Fay Noia, 391, 423-424, 822, 841, 837 attack normally occurs secure through avenue cf. MacCollom, 426 317, 323, 96 2086, 2090-2091, 48 666 (1976) (plurality opinion), 12 "meaningful access" By presented application she represented Ross, briefs opinions sufficient tools se gain courts possess power 614-615, 2446. necessarily obtains respect Since insist designed solely 13 relies 401, 838-839, 821 (1985), proposition though grant done so, enumerated Anders. Evitts, cannot penalize dismissing mandatory rules. ruling, place, 684, 14 867 (1894), could cut running afoul Noting "[t]he unique among if withdrawn consideration applicable due process norms," 400-401, 838, reasoned "when opts act field where its action elements, nonetheless accord dictates Constitution—and, particular, Clause," 839. argues allowing complying deprived state-law "effective" assistance. provides comfort. Initially, substantive —that ineffectiveness—depends exist More important, unlike actually here suffered deprivation, assuming moment relevant. Cf. 588, 4, 1301, (per curiam ); Polk County Dodson, 454 312, 445, 70 509 found satisfied counsel, record. disagree holding. ruled law. conclusion, obligations, both fulfilled. received exactly entitled receive law—an competent counsel—she deprivation 15 At bottom, decision rests premise unwilling accept—that chooses offer help those exact assume. contrary, area discretion develop implement programs aid Pennsylvania, context, put difficult between affording whatsoever following strict guidelines ennunciated judgment cause inconsistent opinion. 16 ordered. 17 judgment. I Court's erred belief (1967), my view, remand able consider order. 19 whom MARSHALL joins, dissenting. Dorothy Finley's carefully, amend file behalf. (Court Pleas) summarily dismiss petition. Today reverses (Superior Court) performance deficient failure comply three sets requirements: Commonwealth McClendon, 495 467, 434 1185 (1981), issued originally either McClendon wishes representation petitioner's 320-321, 568, 571 perform conscientious evaluation write "arguable" notice client. "an exhaustive record" "independent determination" No client required. 571. 22 addition complied neither requirements, lower specific requirements circumstance, rested ground, certiorari improvidently granted. controversy involving ripe Finally, believe rights protection. dissent. 23 * ensure compliance instructions ground decision. exhausting appeals Finley pursuant Act, (1982) (PCHA). indigent, PCHA manner. 334, 1183, 1184 rely refer statutory stated guaranteed "only previous determined adversely petitioner . ." Ibid. (emphasis added). instructed limit Finley, "explore grounds complaint, investigate facts" "articulate relief." allow 334-335, 1184-1185. 24 meet requirements. Appointed read "Notes Testimony" original indicate how research 322-323, 572-573. Instead filing amending required, submitted "no-merit" letter describing limited listing identical attack, stating why regarded meritless.1 advance latter maintaining merit. Tr. Oral Arg. 17. Indeed, evidence ever letter. inform seek proceed before court. 571, 573. receiving no-merit letter, hearing. New dismissal. 25 noting interpretation PCHA. [Pennsylvania] remanded, saw [contentions time], disposed earlier appellant's wished afford amass other 321, 571-572. 26 cited Rule 1504 Rules Criminal Procedure "act advocate fulfilling role." 572. list several "which merit" " 'bare available Court.' 572-573 (citing Brief Appellant).2 amended complaint satisfy mandate effective brief, "the uncounselled" 572 (citation omitted). 27 reliance independently adequately justified remand. There plain statement indicating independence interwoven determination. Michigan Long, 463 1032, 1041, 103 3469, 3476-3477, 77 1201 (1983). referred very purpose basing reversal McClendon. 321-322, As result, address issue general govern much less applicable. II 28 yet another reason. leaves impose complies imposed 322, 571.3 Because nor McClendon,4 specify follow.5 29 conjecture alternative availability duties decided, procedures—not requirements—are McGeth, 347 333, 344-345, 500 860, 866 (1985). Lowenberg, 232, 235, 425 1100, 1101-1102 equally divided ruling occasion today's unnecessary adequacy oppose imposition approves "flexible enlightened approach." Petitioner 11. parties adversarial interests, regarding Steffel Thompson, 415 452, 460, 1209, 1216, 39 505 (1974).6 31 avoid issuing advisory await procedures.7 eventual later prematurely reversing inferior court.8 III 32 abandonment advocacy violate denigrates involves similar 621, 2449, ante, readily distinguished Ross. Under 33 construing legislation, concluded: 34 "We pause note salutary best comports efficient judicial administration serious prisoner's claims. Counsel's ability frame legally fashion insures will brought attention. Mitchell, 427 395, 397, 235 148, 149 35 Legislature recognized importance adopting PCHA, An completely preclude allows summary dismissal, petitions subject petitions. Pa.Rule Crim.Proc. 1504.9 36 justifies refuse lesser deliver inadequate services. settled Constitution, affords manner 400, (1985); supra; (1969); Smith Bennett, 365 708, 713, 81 895, 898, (1961). 37 'Due process' emphasizes individual dealing State." 609, 2443. "[F]undamental entitles 'an within adversary system.' Ake Oklahoma, 470 68, 77, 1087, 1093, 84 53 (1985) explained: "This merely nonindigent obtain. induce pursue vigorously own ready references authorities hand, aid. former shift entirely himself cold advocate. handling tend constantly increasing charge ineffective handled diligence entitled." 745, Even clearly minimal standards minimum, "very system partisan sides promote ultimate objective guilty innocent go free." Herring York, 422 853, 862, 2550, 2555, 45 593 (1975). unfair argue client's providing advice attorney. "It thing told way him, quite feel sandbagged arm government seems helping seal doom." Suggs States, 129 U.S.App.D.C. 133, 136, 391 F.2d 971, 974 (1968). concedes "due record." 14. criticism insufficient terms, "bare Court." 40 Equal Protection demands eliminate disparities classes individuals. rational defendants. hard advocates dismissal conducting assessment impoverished take whatever affords, imperative scrutinized receives representation. Otherwise, unclear errors hidden, meaningless ritual," person IV transforms ritual.10 face identification possible means ensuring representation, jurisdiction render "Respect courts, well avoidance rendering opinions, cornerstones refusal ground." 1040, 3476. respectfully 43 44 Without bothering identify blithely assumes rest ground. agree. rules often patterned precedents, are, nonetheless, explicitly applying appeal." 570 (1984) noted "derived from" 1967 493. "plain statement" test 1037-1044, 3474-3478, (1983), satisfied, grounds. me, reasons Part BRENNAN's alone portion discussion conceivably 561-563. event, concluding stemmed so. believed sacrosanct missing, still conclude lacks over unrealistic—and unfair—to expect judges office acquire familiarity jurisprudence intricacies jurisdiction. occasions decisions far too rare make appropriate them familiar Long presumption. denigrating enough justices 50 Courts include decisions, demanding 716 20,000 state-court Court.* 46 Before petitioned writ Had accepted originating unless "rendered highest had." U.S.C. 1257. When Commonwealth's granted, accompany reasons. knowing correct incorrect 47 separate interest "avoidance opinions," 3476, strongly favors step jurisdiction-expanding path marked Delaware Van Arsdall, 673, 689, 106 1431, 1440, 674 (1986) (STEVENS, Instead, want gave explanation meritless. 573, 4. number Sixth violations 15, 7. acknowledged always procedure, enunciated 320, ("[C]ompliance unnecessary" concludes frivolous). satisfied. "Here, mention search certify reading endeavor uncover frivolity level." (footnotes follows: "Since utilized herein defective, acted deprive evidentiary hearing discerned accordance opinion." 323-324, additional validity determines applicability inappropriate lack chosen procedure follow, decree Republic Gas Co. 334 62, 69-71, 68 972, 977-978, 1212 (1948). Second, briefed litigants. Third, impermissible Such approach consistent past practices Court: 'considered practice abstract, hypothetical contingent questions, question necessity formulate rule broader precise facts applied, except reference applied. .' Public Workers 75, 90, 22, 67 556, 564, 91 754 (1947); Cox Broadcasting Corp. Cohn, 420 469, 510, 1029, 1053-1054, 328 (1975) (REHNQUIST, instant Review argued. ordered "as having granted." 510 304, 507 822 (1986). Britton, 620, 506 895 (1986); Dayton Dayton, 632, 901 special significance rendered resulted conclusively therefore, laws South Dakota Opperman, 428 364, 396, 3092, 3110, 49 1000 (MARSHALL, figures 1984 statistics reported recent publications. (Conference Administrators Statistics Information Project National Center Courts, R. Roper, Elsner, & V. Flango, Appellate Jurisdiction Guide Statistical Reporting 5-9 (figure judges); Caseload Statistics: Annual Report 1984, pp. 195-248 (June 1986) judges).

Category: 1