Opinion ID: 1211278
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Nature of Counsel's Duty

Text: We think it obvious, also, that the role of defense counsel at a competency hearing is different from the role of defense counsel at other proceedings. If the defense attorney's primary responsibility is to protect the defendant's exercise of his constitutional rights, what adversarial position should the attorney assume when the issue being determined is the ability of the defendant to exercise his rights? ... ... Counsel has no obligation to see that the court makes what counsel personally believes to be the correct ruling with respect to the suppression of evidence or the determination of probable cause. It could be argued similarly that the correct determination of competency is the responsibility of the court, not defense counsel and therefore, if he believes that a plea is in his client's best interest, counsel should take the adversarial position that his client is competent. The problem with this argument is that defense counsel has a responsibility for the correct determination of the competency issue that he does not have with respect to other issues. A trial court's erroneous rulings in favor of the defendant on issues other than competency do not adversely affect the defendant's constitutional rights; instead the court may simply be giving those rights a broader sweep than it should. But if the court erroneously concludes that the defendant is competent, the court's decision goes directly to the defendant's ability to waive or assert his constitutional rights. Although it is the court's responsibility to determine the issue of competency, counsel has the obligation, flowing from his duty to protect his client's rights, to see that the issue is decided correctly. As with the question of raising the competency issue, counsel is not free to chart an adversary course at the hearing based on his view of the client's best interests. Pizzi, supra, 45 U. CHI. L. REV. at 58.