Document: 488 U.S. 563 109 S.Ct. 757 102 L.Ed.2d 927 UNITED STATES, Petitionerv.Ray C. BROCE and Broce Construction Co., Inc. No. 87-1190. Argued Oct. 4, 1988. Decided Jan. 23, 1989. Syllabus Respondents pleaded guilty to two separate conspiracy indictments in a single proceeding District Court. One indictment charged respondents with entering into an agreement rig bids on certain highway project violation of the Sherman Act, other made similar charges respect different project. After Court conducted hearing, at which were represented by counsel, found pleas free voluntary understanding their consequences nature charges, convictions entered sentences imposed. subsequently filed motion vacate under second indictment, contending, reliance Court's holding another case involving same bid-rigging conspiracy, that only one existed double jeopardy principles required be set aside. The denied motion, but Appeals reversed, notwithstanding pleas, entitled introduce evidence outside original record support one-conspiracy claim, since pleading they admitted acts described indictments, not legal consequences, moreover, did expressly state conspiracies separate, no such concessions could inferred from pleas. On remand, granted finding there was affirmed. Held: Respondents' challenge is foreclosed convictions. Pp. 569-576. (a) In admissions inherent plea "go constituting conspiracy," misapprehended effect plea. By plea, accused does simply he discrete indictment; admits guilt substantive crime. Here, alleged distinct agreements, erred concluding because explicitly concede both. When both conceded offenses. 569-571. (b) guilty, relinquished opportunity receive factual hearing claim. That attorney discuss issues them prior had considered possibility raising defense before pleading, entitle claim waived right raise defense. Conscious waiver necessary each potential 571-574. (c) Under well-settled principle intelligent who has been advised competent counsel may collaterally attacked, respondents, have called question character collateral relief sought. P. 574. (d) exception rule barring attack established Blackledge v. Perry, 417 21, 94 2098, 40 628, Menna New York, 423 61, 96 241, 46 195, cases where conviction must aside defendant's haled court violated, application this case. contrast those resolved without any need go beyond record, prove introducing new record. 574-576. Reversed. KENNEDY, J., delivered opinion Court, REHNQUIST, C.J., WHITE, STEVENS, O'CONNOR, SCALIA, JJ., joined. concurring opinion, post, p. 580. BLACKMUN, dissenting BRENNAN MARSHALL, joined, 581. Roy T. Englert, Jr., Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Glenn E. Casebeer, II, Coffeyville, Kan., respondent. Justice KENNEDY 1 We consider here circumstances defendant criminal charge assert upon sentence. Respondents, convicted counts contend now require sentence count United States Tenth Circuit held supporting directed further proceedings hold judgments conviction. 2 * A. 3 Ray Inc., bid work projects Kansas. Two contracts awarded became subject charging concerted suppress competition 26 Stat. 209, as amended, 15 U.S.C. § 1. relevant portions are forth Appendix our opinion. first agreement, sometime or about April 1978, particular July 1979, Both discussed during negotiations, acknowledged agreements charged. Plea Agreement between America Defendant Broce, App. Pet. Cert. 126a, 127a; 133a, 134a. 4 proceeding. fully accord Rule 11 Federal Rules Criminal Procedure voluntary, charges. all stages allegations ineffective. Convictions then sentenced years' imprisonment count, terms run concurrently, fine $50,000 count. also mail fraud 18 1341, here. corporation fined $750,000 total $1,500,000. Neither respondent having appealed, final. B 5 day against Robert Beachner Co. Act statute. yet third Kansas construction These defendants, however, chose path than taken respondents: proceeded trial acquitted. acquittal (Beachner I), returned grand jury three violations fraud. mentioned I. 6 Once again, pursued strategy followed Prior trial, moved dismiss ground arrangements identified merely smaller parts overarching existing among contractors within State. light its I, company argued prosecution would place it jeopardy. 7 dismiss. 555 F.Supp. 1273 (Kan.1983) II). It "continuous, cooperative effort bids, thereby eliminating price competition, permeated industry excess twenty-five years, including period 25, February 7, 1980, time encompassed I II indictments." Id., 1277. based determination common objective participants eliminate method organizing bidding projects, jargon throughout industry, mutual interdependent obligations created contractors. Concluding findings clearly erroneous, affirmed dismissal. 729 F.2d1278 (CA10 1984). C 8 might surmise defendants watched awe, if envy. What sought profit Beachner's success. issued decision pursuant 35(a) own contained indictment. Relying schemes conspiracy. respondents' earlier admission Government's conspiracies, concluded arguments contrary. Nos. 81-20119-01 82-20011-01 (Kan., Nov. 18, 1983), 112a. 9 A panel reversed. 753 F.2d 811 (1985). judgment vacated reheard en banc. Citing decisions 628 (1974), 195 (1975) (per curiam), divided banc draw findings, 781 792 1986). rejected argument Double Jeopardy Clause "does constitute individual waiver." 795. contention construed conspiracies. observed "specifically allege conspiracies," "the subsumed whether more existed." 796. 10 citing aspects restrain competition. June 30, 1986), 5a. appeal judgment, noted intervening Ricketts Adamson, 483 1, 107 2680, 97 (1987), clear protection waiver. Nonetheless, while invalidated broader rationale underlying protections waived, left intact narrower themselves waivers. 86-2166 86-2202 (CA10, Aug. 1987), 1a. certiorari, 485 903, 108 1073, 99 232 (1988). ensuing comprehend elements sustain binding, final lawful Accordingly, when become offender seeks reopen proceeding, inquiry ordinarily confined counseled voluntary. If answer affirmative general rule, foreclose attack. There exceptions face power enter impose below find inapplicable. applies bar 12 petition certiorari seek review part overall Instead, Government challenges theory entitled, predicated court's view that, consequences. As include express statement reasoned, concession 13 F.2d, 796, "is confession various acts." Boykin Alabama, 395 238, 242, 89 1709, 1711, 23 274 (1969). "admission committed crime him." North Carolina Alford, 400 32, 91 160, 164, 27 162 (1970). stating admitting why instructed open offered," Fed.Rule Crim.Proc. 11(c)(1), "cannot truly unless possesses law relation facts," McCarthy States, 394 459, 466, 1166, 1171, 22 418 14 Just pleads specified offense, so too facial offenses crimes. agreements: first, beginning 1978 project, second, months later charge, term "agreement" synonymous itself, great operative force. Braverman 317 49, 53, 63 99, 101, 87 L.Ed. (1942), "[t]he gist defined statute . commit unlawful acts," follows precise extent determined reference embraces defines objects." several crimes constitutes reasoning, multiple explicit premise started times embraced objectives, offenses.* opportunity, instead attempt show existence trial-type They to, hence entitlement. Beachner, believe strategic miscalculation. Our precedents demonstrate, grounds do justify setting otherwise valid 16 Brady 397 742, 90 1463, 25 747 (1970), petitioner kidnaping what 1201(a) (1964 ed.). He knowing guilty. Nine years after we Jackson, 390 570, 88 1209, 20 138 (1968), provision providing death penalty recommendation unconstitutional. This avail Brady, his influenced erroneous assessment sentencing render invalid. observed: 17 "A withdraw discovers long accepted calculus quality State's likely penalties attached alternative courses action. More particularly, absent misrepresentation impermissible conduct agents, intelligently applicable vulnerable judicial indicate rested faulty premise." U.S., 757, S.Ct., 1473 (citation omitted). Similarly, McMann Richardson, 759, 1441, 763 make allegation misjudged admissibility confession. "Waiving entails risk good-faith evaluations reasonably will turn out mistaken either facts given facts." 770, 1448. See Tollett Henderson, 411 258, 267, 93 1602, 1608, 36 235 (1973) ("[J]ust sufficient seeking retrospect correctly appraised constitutional significance historical facts, likewise pursuit uncovered possible infirmity proceedings") 19 submitted affidavit Kenneth F. Crockett, served entered. 72-73. Crockett avers pleading. these circumstances, cannot "intentional relinquishment abandonment known privilege." Johnson Zerbst, 304 458, 464, 58 1019, 1023, 82 1461 (1938). suggested conscious Waiver sense required. For example, first-degree murder, habeas corpus contending should black citizens excluded indicted him. Although relating selection attorney, irrelevant: 21 "If issue cast solely 'waiver,' undoubtedly correct But just trilogy direct merits claimed antecedent there, conclude respondent's alike forecloses independent discrimination jury." 266, 1607. Menna, 62, n. 2, ("[W]aiver basic ingredient line cases"). affidavit, consequence, bearing Relinquishment derives subjective range defenses, necessarily entry complied ensuring waiving kind. failure provide advice form basis ineffective assistance serve predicate 24 sum, explained Mabry Johnson, 467 504, 508, 104 2543, 2546-47, 81 437 (1984), "[i]t well settled person, attacked." controls therefore seek. An L.Ed.2d628 supra, bar. state-law misdemeanor assault deadly weapon. Pursuant procedures, tried county jury, permitted, once convicted, Superior obtain de novo. appeal, prosecutor obtained felony weapon intent kill inflict serious bodily injury. prosecutorial vindictiveness exercise raised sufficiently due process concerns forbidding State bring position. subsequent Blackledge, unlike Tollett, charge. very initiation him thus operated deny law." 30-31, 2104. refused, grant immunity, obey order testify jury. adjudicated contempt civil jail. released, refusal questions. sentenced, appealed grounds. York proposition "[w]here precluded Constitution haling federal requires even guilty." 242. added, important qualification: 28 "We never waived. waive that—judged face—the constitutionally prosecute." 63, (emphasis added). 29 neither nor expand evidence. cases, forward presiding judge (and ultimately were) venture implicit irrelevant, lay all. facially duplicative offense Menna's conceivably extend redundant offense. 30 here, contrast, relying Indeed, earlier, contradicting degree bargain incorporates Government, agreed heightens already substantial interest finality 31 APPENDIX TO OPINION OF THE COURT Excerpts Indictments 32 "UNITED STATES DISTRICT KANSAS 33 "Criminal 34 "United 35 Gerald R. Gumm, Defendants 37 "[Filed: 17, 1981] 38 "V 39 "OFFENSE CHARGED "11. Beginning April, continuing thereafter, exact dates being unknown, Kansas, Gumm herein, others engaged combination Project 23-60-RS-1080(9) let contract involved Federal-Aid unreasonable restraint above-described interstate trade commerce Title 15, Code, Section commonly Act. 41 "12. aforesaid consisted concert action co-conspirators, were: 42 "(a) To allocate 1978; 43 "(b) submit collusive, noncompetitive, rigged connection above-referenced 44 "13. purpose forming effectuating co-conspirators done things which, hereinbefore charged, combined conspired do, including: 45 Discussing submission prospective 23-60-RS-1080(9); Designating successful low bidder project; 47 "(c) Submitting intentionally high complementary designated bidder; 48 "(d) proposals containing false, fictitious fraudulent statements entries; 49 "(e) 1978." 50 "IN FOR 51 82-20011 52 53 54 Defendants. 55 Feb. 1982] 56 57 59 "10. July, KRL 29-2(26) public 60 61 1979; 62 64 29-2(26); 65 66 67 68 payment consideration value contractor induce non-competitive, project." concurring. 69 While join write separately identify doubtful rests. assume price-fixing activities 1979 carried years. 70 partnership purposes." Kissel, 218 601, 608, 124, 126, 1168 (1910). continues over time" "agreement offenses." 52, (1942). Thus, continuous, see ante, 567, unquestionably single, violated follow, furtherance illegal master plan prosecuted separately. 71 All fixing 1978. 143a-151a. true year performed county. 136a-142a. Each am sure fact still prosecutions violations. 72 something perverse assumption rights prosecuting complete flagrant ongoing quarter century. Whether merged decided Yet making today. 73 whom MARSHALL join, dissenting. 74 practical importance day-to-day administration justice, bestow prosecute lacks. found, affirmed, brought punish twice behavior, Fifth Amendment. 75 569, contest argues, defendants' wholly urges us stand barred. Because inappropriate reviewing close eyes violation, obvious reading entitles dissent majority's ruling conclusive. 76 Brady1 majority today, most instances conclusive resolves (1975), unequivocally constitutionality court." 242; recent allows worded none limited ability, waiver, authority 77 true, notes, evidentiary assess claims. nothing indicates announced dependent fortuity claims apparent records resort hearing. surprising. Menna. Certainly, suggests inappropriate. developed, 2100; remand way, reads compelling, implying, alters infuses mere happenstance meaning draws distinctions belong. 78 justifies outcome looking four words dicta footnote 62-63, 2. language is: "[A] prosecute" takes mean can prevail 79 much better footnote, emphasis word "claim." read merits. interpretation Blackledge. gives appropriate force footnote's placing some limit ability foundation proceedings. Most important, real content rights. 80 provides powerful example especially maintain context. Conspiracy, "elastic, sprawling pervasive offense," Krulewitch 336 440, 445, 716, 719, 790 (1949) (Jackson, Court), recognized difficult define limit. "cast nets" cover broad timeframe numerous individuals, clandestine uncover. See, e.g., Blumenthal 332 539, 557, 248, 256, 92 154 (1947). permissible breadth abuse confusion. Judge Parker said meaningfully ago: "Blanket 'continuing' named 'other persons jurors unknown' fulfil useful crime, used way contravene guaranties. government sees fit send time, barred, result avoided formed district overt committed, it, additional objects statutes purview, involves substantially first. matter substance nullified forms pleading." Short 614, 624 (CA4 1937). Sanabria 54, 65-66, 98 2170, 2179-80, (1978): "The manner drawn ignored, function ensure 'in [the defendant] [will] sho[w] accuracy plead former conviction,' " quoting Cochran 157 286, 290, 630, 704 (1895). Russell 369 749, 1038, 240 (1962). 83 recognized, vague overlapped. included 576, few paragraphs differ, fails acknowledge almost identical. 84 occurring place, object restraining open-ended number material respects. alleging definite date, termination date. Moreover, "others unknown"; so, too, therefore, participants. vagueness, coupled identical elements, strong inference conspiracy.2 reason alone, proper 85 duplicitous betrayed conspirators artificially paying noncompetitive well. Ante, 577—578, 579. theoretically involve highly unlikely. Rather, seems me, conspirator sham rewarded chosen fact, Department release weeks Tennessee scheme follows: 'The prearranged usually get job coming.' BNA Antitrust & Trade Regulation Rep. 523 (1982), unpublished release. generally General Accounting Office, Report House Committee Public Works Transportation, Actions Being Taken Deal Bid Rigging Highway Program (May 1983). compels conclusion initial covering projects.3 86 argues realized this, refused agree. less aware and, fail oversight, reward Government's. fragile guarantee limitations [can avoided] simple expedient dividing series temporal spatial units.' 72, 2183, Brown Ohio, 432 161, 169, 2221, 2227, 187 (1977). pointed "single barred III remains procedures follow faced above, determining prosecution. alone. Statements pretrial clarify ambiguity, challenge. absence definitive assure questioned alleges conduct. overly burdensome replicate avoided. Abney 431 651, 659, 2034, 2040, 651 (1977), makes whatsoever obviously depend case, probably explanation how differs truth many sufficiency independence determinable testimony.4 rarely extensive complaint conducting present problems proof, administrative headaches, modicum Every prosecutor, avoid carefully considering actual scope drawing addressed describing particularity conspiracy.5 steps absolutely required, good sense, help every raised. Directly addressing questions prevent situations like notice, challenge, reconsider inclination instead, litigate issue. solution, properly balances interests unaware Constitution's prohibition fundamental, complicated presented. legitimate punishing allowing gain untoward benefits use imprecise significant burden necessary, dissent. certainly viewed time. 565, receiving Furthermore, informed maximum punishment "on charge," stated understood. 36. sentencing, prepared "Official Version Offense" inclusion presentence report "two conspiracies" giving rise indictments. 51. At "any dispute pre-sentence official version ones. 63-64. suggest events forfeited conspiracies; contrary, alone conclusion. incidents note one, shared 748, 1468, (1970); 766, 1446, courts looked factors. Some (1) (2) participants, (3) statutory (4) (5) places took place. Ragins, 840 1184, 1188-1189 1988); Atkins, 834 426, (CA5 1987); Korfant, 771 660, 662 (CA2 1985) (considering eight factors). appears focus states 570-571. Had reached 580, separately, determinative. majority, this. know long, stipulation, 566-567, worthwhile copy advance scheduled Here received 8, 1981, contributed

Category: 0