Opinion ID: 2010460
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Defense counsel negated Cooke's right to testify in his own defense.

Text: A second fundamental decision reserved for the defendant alone to make is the decision to testify. [50] Cooke wanted to exercise his right to testify in his own defense, but his attorneys refused to call him as a witness because they believed that he would assert his innocence, contradicting counsel's position that Cooke was guilty of the crimes charged. They explained that Cooke's assertion of factual innocence would not be perjury because Cooke believed he was innocent. [51] The defense attorneys then told the trial judge, who would make the final decision on whether to sentence Cooke to life or death, that they believed Cooke had committed the crimes and was guilty but mentally ill. Ultimately, the trial judge called Cooke to testify because his defense attorneys refused to do so. Cooke testified that he did not agree with his attorneys' guilty but mentally ill strategy and that he was on his own for representation. Cooke denied committing the crimes in an effort to realize his trial objective of being found not guilty. In an effort to realize their independent trial objective of having the jury return a verdict of guilty but mentally ill, Cooke's defense attorneys completely negated Cooke's objective of having the jury find him not guilty by introducing into evidencewithout seeking Cooke's waiver of the psychotherapist-patient privilege [52] a confession which Cooke denied making. Cooke's attorneys also attempted to ask Cooke's pastor, on direct examination, whether Cooke had confessed, but Cooke refused to waive his right to protect the privileged communication. [53] That exchange on the record illustrates the magnitude of the conflict between Cooke and his attorneys. The prosecution recognized that the question of Cooke's innocence was no longer an issue after the defense attorneys introduced Cooke's disputed statements to Dr. Turner. The prosecutor said: I would ask your Honor to consider the shifting landscape as of today; to wit, Cooke's confession is now in evidence. In response to an argument about prejudice from the introduction of other crimes, the prosecutor said: That issue is dead and gone now because Cooke has admitted at least that crime, that Bonistall burglary, rape and homicide. What's at issue in this case now, and really it's been an issue in the case first and foremost since [defense counsel's] wonderful opening statement, is Cooke's mental state. Consequently, Cooke's fundamental right to testify in his own defense was effectively negated by the objective of his defense attorneys to have the jury find him guilty but mentally ill. [54]