Document: 477 U.S. 527 106 S.Ct. 2661 91 L.Ed.2d 434 Michael Marnell SMITH, Petitionerv.Edward W. MURRAY, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections. No. 85-5487. Argued March 4, 1986. Decided June 26, Syllabus Prior to petitioner's trial in a state court for murder woman, he was examined by psychiatrist appointed the at request his counsel. During examination, asked petitioner both about and prior incidents deviant sexual conduct, stated that once tore clothes off girl on school bus before deciding not rape her. Following jury trial, convicted. At sentencing phase, prosecution called stand, and, over defense's objection, described incident bus. After further evidence presented petitioner, recommended death sentence. On appeal Supreme Court Virginia, raised number claims but did assign any error concerning admission psychiatrist's testimony, counsel later explaining postconviction hearing had decided pursue claim after determining case law would support position time. The affirmed conviction sentence, addressing issues prosecution's use psychiatric testimony because under rule only errors assigned appellant be considered. exhausting remedies, sought writ habeas corpus Federal District Court, which denied petition. Appeals affirmed. Held: Petitioner defaulted underlying constitutional as failing press it direct appeal. Murray v. Carrier, 478, p. 2639, 397. Pp. 2665-2669. (a) has carried burden showing cause noncompliance with Virginia's rules procedure. A deliberate, tactical decision particular is very antithesis kind circumstance warrant excusing defendant's failure adhere State's fair orderly disposition its criminal cases. Here, counsel's question an such magnitude rendered performance constitutionally deficient test Strickland Washington, 466 668, 104 2052, 80 674. Nor can rely novelty "cause" rules, where appears various forms been percolating lower courts years time original 533-537. (b) It clear record application prejudice will result "fundamental miscarriage justice," alleged neither precluded development true facts nor resulted false ones. Thus, even assuming that, legal matter, should have jury, pervert jury's deliberations ultimate whether fact constituted continuing threat society. 537-539. 769 F.2d 170 (CA4 1985), O'CONNOR, J., delivered opinion BURGER, C.J., WHITE, POWELL, REHNQUIST, JJ., joined. BRENNAN, filed dissenting opinion, MARSHALL, joined, ante, 516. STEVENS, MARSHALL BLACKMUN, Parts II III post, 539. J. Lloyd Snook, III, Charlottesville, Va., petitioner. James E. Kulp, Richmond, respondent. Justice O'CONNOR Court. 1 We granted certiorari decide if so, what circumstances, prosecutor may elicit from mental health professional content interview conducted explore possibility presenting defenses trial. also agreed review Appeals' determination this irrelevant holding Zant Stephens, 462 862, 103 2733, 77 235 (1983). however, we conclude Accordingly, decline address merits affirm judgment dismissing petition corpus. 2 * convicted May 1977 Audrey Weiler. According confession, encountered Ms. Weiler secluded area near home raped her knifepoint. Fearing could send him back prison, then grabbed neck choked until she fell unconscious. When realized still alive, dragged into nearby river, submerged head, repeatedly stabbed knife. subsequent medical examination indicated attributable three clusters lethal injuries: asphyxia strangulation, drowning, multiple stab wounds. 3 counsel, David Pugh, explored defenses. Towards end, Mr. Pugh requested appoint private psychiatrist, Dr. Wendell Pile, conduct Aware reports were routinely forwarded admissible law, advised discuss episodes anyone. App. 134. See Gibson Commonwealth, 216 Va. 412, 219 S.E.2d 845 (1975). Although general advice intended apply forthcoming testified "did specifically tell [petitioner] say anything Doctor Pile offense or offenses." 132. course ask conduct. Tr. State Habeas Hearing 19. initially declined answer, torn carry out plan 44. That information, together tentative diagnosis "Sociopathic Personality; Sexual Deviation (rape)," court, copies sent who trying Commonwealth. Id., 43-45. no point during inform statements might used against right remain silent present so desired. 90. Cf. Estelle Smith, 451 454, 101 1866, 68 359 (1981). 4 phase Commonwealth stand. Over 934-935. cross-examination, repeated earlier conclusion "sociopathic personality." 936. examining second introduced evidence. revealed 1973 paroled penitentiary charge less than four months raping murdering defense 14 character witnesses, regular churchgoer, member choir, conscientious student high school, good soldier Vietnam. lengthy deliberation, sentenced death. 5 appealed sentence Virginia. In brief 13 separate claims, including broad challenge constitutionality penalty provisions, objections several court's evidentiary rulings, exclusion prospective juror voir dire. not, Pile's testimony. hearing, explained consciously "Virginia [not] our time." 143. Various Commonwealth's raised, amicus curiae Post-Conviction Assistance Project University Law School. 6 all respects. Smith 455, 248 135 (1978). footnote, noted pursuant considered those arguments advanced concerned defendant himself. 460, n. 1, S.E.2d, 139, 1. This certiorari, which, again, urge violated rights Constitution. 441 967, 99 2419, 60 1074 (1979). 7 1979, Circuit City Williamsburg County City. For first since argued privilege self-incrimination Fifth Fourteenth Amendments ruled, forfeited proceedings. solely issue ineffective assistance heard reasons Pugh's Amendment basis found assistant researched question, determined unlikely succeed. found, "counsel exercised reasonable preserve objection appeal, . informed, deliberation." Pet. Cert. 71. denial contending erred finding defaulted. accept Morris, 221 cxliii (1981), again certiorari. 454 1128, 102 981, 71 117 8 Having exhausted United States Eastern unpublished order, petition, "clearly barred" Court's Wainwright Sykes, 433 72, 97 2497, 53 594 (1977). 158. reaching conclusion, Judge "the default attorney's ignorance inadvertence, deliberate decision." Ibid. 9 Fourth affirmed, different grounds. Procunier, (1985). Finding unnecessary procedural substantive claim, held erroneous, invalidating relied two distinct aggravating factors recommend penalty. bore one factors, likelihood "constitute serious society." Va.Code § 19.2-264.2 (1983); 1102. circumstance, believed, U.S., 884, S.Ct., 2746, 235, required error, any, overall validity Sielaff, 474 918, 245, 88 254 (1985), now authority 397 (1986). 10 Under raise ordinarily bars consideration proceeding. See, e.g., Coppola Warden Penitentiary, 222 369, 282 (1981); Slayton Parrigan, 215 27, 205 680 (1974). case, enforced declining consider concededly included initial Consistent intimations Reed Ross, 468 11, 2901, 2907-2908, 82 (1984), 397, federal must evaluate appellate defaults same standards when fails although times retain power look beyond forfeitures, exercise inappropriate unless succeeds "actual resulting violation." supra, 84, 2505; 485, ----. As more fully congruence between reflects concerns finality comity are virtually identical regardless timing comply legitimate 11 need determine actual allegedly improper think self-evident failed demonstrate procedures. past essay comprehensive catalog circumstances justify cause. 13, 2909; see 91, 2508. Our cases, leave doubt Reed: 12 "[D]efense make forgo opportunity—for instance, object appeal—and discovers tactic unsuccessful, alternative strategy court. encouragement offend generally accepted principles comity, undermine accuracy efficiency judicial systems detriment concerned. Procedural nature are, therefore, inexcusable, cannot qualify 'cause' purposes review." 14, 2909 (internal quotation citation omitted). Here unambiguously reveals objected elected perception little chance success courts. With benefit hindsight, contends proved incorrect. Zahradnick, 581 75 1978) (repudiating reasoning (1975)). Even acceptance argument deliberately abandoned excused habeas. Indeed, prospect "may decide, upon reflection, contention valid" undergirds established "perceived futility alone constitute cause," Engle Isaac, 456 107, 130, 36, 1558, 1573 783 (1982); "[a]llowing defendants deprive [the] opportunity" reconsider previously rejected fundamentally odds animate Sykes progeny. 1573. Notwithstanding appeal—a dispositive effort satisfy Syke 's requirement—petitioner decision, though made ignorance. Had investigated fully, maintains, "it inconceivable concluded without merit it." Reply Brief 3. 15 squarely foreclosed holds mere recognize factual despite recognizing it, does default." Supra, 486-487, 2641. 133-134, 1574-75. seriously maintained 674 (1984). Carrier reaffirmed effective isolated sufficiently egregious prejudicial." 496, 2650; Cronic, 648, 657, 20, 2039, 2046 657 But falls far short meeting rigorous standard. conducting vigorous guilt phases surveyed extensive transcript, current worth pursuing process "winnowing weaker focusing on" likely prevail, being incompetence, hallmark advocacy. Jones Barnes, 463 745, 751-752, 3308, 3312-3313, 987 often most informed fail anticipate willingness underestimate repudiate rule. But, Washington clear, "[a] assessment attorney requires every eliminate distorting effects reconstruct challenged perspective 689, 2065. Viewed light submitted opening well within "wide range professionally competent assistance" Sixth 690, 2066. 16 rules. 18, 2911 ("[W]here novel reasonably available accordance applicable procedures"). decisions Ake Oklahoma, 470 68, 105 1087, 84 affirmance lend excluded. comparison makes plain, developments task easier, "available" all. candidly conceded, advances 20-21, 12; Moreover, Amendments. School Amicus Curiae 780293, pp. 53-62. these simply open presses unavailable 17 conclude, determination, end inquiry. " '[i]n appropriate cases' concepts 'must yield imperative correcting unjust incarceration.' 495, 2654, quoting 135. "where violation probably actually innocent, grant absence 2650. 18 acknowledge concept "actual," "legal," innocence translate easily context capital offense. Nonetheless, justice." Engle, 135, 1576. There allegation way misleading. testify effect foreclosing meaningful exploration While concern real abstract, here clearly shows crime stood accused committing reluctant do ultimately subjects. short, serve believe refusal carries risk manifest justice. 19 concur STEVENS' suggestion displace amorphous fairness" Post, 542-543. Precisely parts Constitution "fundamental" left future elaboration. raises "substantial, colorable" entertain matter how fairness opportunity 546. reject differently depending imposes laws. similarly there "fundamentally unfair" enforcing cases devoid substantial undermined determination. view profound societal costs attend jurisdiction, "carries justification." H. Friendly, Is Innocence Irrelevant? Collateral Attack Criminal Judgments, 38 U.Chi.L.Rev. 142, 146 (1970); 126-129, 1571-1572. unrelated innocence, represented full system, yet procedure, carried. 20 upholding dismissal 21 Affirmed. 22 [For 2678.] 23 whom BLACKMUN join BRENNAN joins dissenting. 24 unquestionably demonstrates meritorious, significant put violated. 25 take conclusion. willing assume (1) compelled violated; (2) Eighth fair, sound proceeding introduction violation; (3) violations difference life fate. merits, concludes presumably meritorious procedurally barred therefore executed. 26 my reach argument. To extent "default," exceedingly minor—perhaps "harmless" error. Petitioner's timely obtained Amendment. respected friend Court—the School's brought attention brief. Smith's proceedings, noted, merits. well-established principle carefully winnowed,1 Court—an unsurprising governing precedent, entirely valid old, decisively claim.2 27 Nevertheless, finds lawyer's include "virtually dispositive." Ante, 535. offers remarkable explanation "[u]nder circumstances"—in stand played critical role penalty—"we 538. 28 I fear lost maze own creation grossly misevaluated requirements "law justice" statutory mission statute.3 understand necessary assess defaulted; violation. 29 begin common ground. historic office Great Writ protection fundamental unfairness known.4 reflected requirement "dispose justice require." U.S.C. 2243. equally "cause prejudice" formulation rigid bar statute, Rule Procedure 12(b)(2), imported;5 standard thus represents lawmaking unabashed form. nonetheless reaffirms today, consistently past,6 requests prejudice," 537; power. Despite rigor cause-and-prejudice standard, moreover, continues commit itself maintaining availability certain "cause," ibid; indeed, Term, emphasized importance remanding prisoner's prisoner show default. 30 flawed First, mistakenly assumes implicating innocence" rises level Second, properly force invalid. Finally, vastly exaggerates interest refusing claim. 31 accurately quotes Carrier: '[W]here default.' 537, seeks transfer ones." explain, why Carrier's correct propriety limiting ability actions; specifically, explain claimed lack fairness, either 32 analysis removed traditional understanding Moore Dempsey, 261 86, 43 265, 67 L.Ed. 543 (1923), convictions sentences five black unconstitutional. dismissed Holmes allegations—systematic blacks threatened mob violence—the considering allegations. presence default—the Arkansas refused discrimination "came too late." 266, 267. nevertheless entertained 92, 33 allegations implicated questions truth-finding process, fairly read rest "innocence" inquiry propounds today. notion petitioners: "The petitioners [the victim] killed other whites [rather petitioners], side deal petitioners' their preserved." 87-88, 265 (emphasis added). Today, adopts converse Holmes' proposition: leaves preserved, considers guilt.7 34 majority's reformulation premised go implicate alluded 126, 1571, (1982).8 If value great force. value, many protections—such cruel unusual punishment, asserted petitioner—are irrelevant, possibly counterproductive.9 Constitution, adopt "accusatorial," rather "inquisitorial" system justice,10 reflect choice. choice afford individual protections—the punishment among them—even necessarily Rather, protections aspect liberty, dignity society affords all, charged heinous crimes. 35 then, exaltation characteristic deeply flawed. protect values addition reliability duty values. 36 begins conception narrow conflicts system. give weight stake case. settled "death imposed country." Gardner Florida, 430 349, 357, 1197, 1204, 51 393 (1977) (STEVENS, J.).11 vital community impose be, appear consequence scrupulously condemned substantial, colorable violation, special obligation, consistent require," render unfair. precisely prompted merits: "[W]e us imminent execution serves sufficient grounds issue." 170, 172 37 suggest adequate obstruct greater appeal.12 brief.13 Since discretion,14 discretionary hardly man die achieve objective. Third, proceedings—after precedent blocking repudiated15—and while reasonable,16 it.17 Fourth, addressed default; customarily defers appeals law,18 rules.19 importantly, inadequacy shown prevailing practice overlook reversible affirming severe sentences.20 mistaken definition appreciate significance penalty, exaggeration amicus, proceedings; (and briefed Court); assumed Because disagree evaluation matters, 39 comments court-appointed majority points out, psychiatrists "were law." 529. However, "[a]t desired." related description assault letter prosecution, defense, description, request, hearing. "future dangerousness," death.21 40 Chief BURGER's absolutely stage THE CHIEF JUSTICE explained, applies proceeding: "Just prevents ' deluded instrument conviction," Culombe Connecticut, 367 [568,] 581, 81 1860, 1867, 1037, Hawkins, Pleas Crown 595 (8th ed. 1824), protects 'the instrument' execution." 462, 1872. prosecutorial interrogation protections, warnings, accorded contexts: "Because defendant] voluntarily consent pretrial possible statements, said psychiatrist] establish dangerousness." 468, 1876. 41 Amendment.22 affect instructive recall issue. Again, JUSTICE's provides guidance: 42 "Miranda exculpatory inculpatory stemming custodial safeguards secure self-incrimination.' purpose admonitions combat saw 'inherently compelling pressures' work person provide awareness consequences forgoing prerequisite 'an intelligent exercise.' 'as mischief guard,' Counselman Hitchcock, 142 547, 562 [12 195, 198, 547] (1892), fulfilled guaranteed 'to chooses speak unfettered suffer silence.' Malloy Hogan, 378 [84 1489, 1493-94, 653] (1964)." 466-468, 1874-1876. 44 Given Amendment, dangerousness" consequent sentence), proper, imperative, protection.23 45 quite respect, reading authored "vileness," flagrant 46 Zant, Georgia invalidation require set aside. reached satisfied ourselves relating invalid admitted.24 seems assumed, were, events, adequately establishes eligible highly prejudicial inadmissible prejudicial, evidence—evidence independent violation—quite undermines violates IV 47 merit. remains addresses last paragraphs opinion—whether warrants aside answered reference language statute—the "as hold, blatant recommendation death, "law," but, clearly, "justice" well. 48 respectfully dissent. 536. (1975), cert. denied, 425 994, 96 2207, 819 (1976). 2243 ("The shall dispose require"). 126 (1982) indisputably honored jurisprudence. centuries, bulwark violate 'fundamental fairness' "). 501-505, 2653-2655, (1986) concurring judgment). conceded "[t]he perfect historical pedigree," Murray, 2650, acknowledged much Sykes." 9, 2907, (1984); Francis Henderson, 536, 538, 1708, 1709, 149 (1976); Fay Noia, 372 391, 398-399, 83 822, 826-27, 837 (1963). doing goes long toward eliminating distinction, relief court—a distinction central Writ. Ex parte Bollman, Cranch 75, 101, 554 (1807) (Marshall, C.J.) ("It demonstrated bar, forward corpus, always involved itself. imprisoned acquitted tried, separated, courts"). supra. Expressing view, William Howard Taft observed determinations, ill advised. Taft, Administration Law, Yale L.J. (1905) ("When proposition, prohibition seems, some aspects, doubtful utility. administration convicting guilty crime, natural follow methods obtain ordinary life"). Moran Burbine, 475 434, 1135, 1147-1148, 89 410 dissenting); Miller Fenton, 104, 110, 445, 449-450, 405 (1985); 7-8, 1493, 653 (1964); Rogers 365 534, 540-541, 735, 739, 760 (1961); Bram States, 168 532, 543-545, 183, 187-188, 568 (1897). California Ramos, 992, 998-999, 3446, 3452, 1171 (1983) opinions Justices, recognized qualitative punishments correspondingly degree scrutiny determination"); 2747, ("[T]here permissible form punishment"); Rummel Estelle, 445 263, 272, 100 1133, 1138, 63 382 (1980) ("This theme, unique analysis, opinions. [A] differs imprisonment"); Lockett Ohio, 438 586, 605, 98 2954, 2965, 57 973 (1978) (BURGER, ("[T]he imposition public profoundly penalties"). Meltzer, Forfeitures Rights, Harv.L.Rev. 1222 ("[W]hen nonfrivolous free refuse requirements. expressly matters default, different"). may, exert pull favor undisputed 440, 849, excuse Noia's Noia perceived result: "His grisly sit imprisonment travel uncertain avenue successful, led retrial sentence." 83, 2504, (emphasizing 'grisly choice' pursuit culminate death"). 506-515, 2650 judgment); 1223-1225; Note, Defaults Appellate Stage Corpus Review, Stan.L.Rev. 56-61 (arguing suppression testimony). Mapp 643, 646, 3, 1684, 1686 933 (1961) (addressing ); Schwinden Burlington Northern, Inc., 691 P.2d 1351, 1358 (Mont.1984) ("We usual amici part action Court"). (CA4) (holding issue), 439 996, 597, 58 669 fact, briefs filed, issued 147 ("[B]oth Zahradnick usefulness theory sustain needed. differences above, find reason here. appeal"). Record 204 (Fifth "was waived considered"). Pembaur Cincinnati, 469, 484-485, 1292, 1301, 452 (1986); Regents Michigan Ewing, 214, 224, 10, 507, 513, 523 S.A. Empresa de Viacao Aerea Rio Grandense, 467 797, 815, 12, 2755, 2766, 660 Bishop Wood, 426 341, 345-347 Propper Clark, 337 472, 69 1333, 1341-1342, 93 1480 (1949). Jenkins Anderson, 447 231, 234, 2124, 2127, 65 86 applicability 'cause'-and-'prejudice' turn interpretation law. resolution state-law aided significantly views possess familiarity [state] law"); 267, 7, 2132, ("Deferring Texas hold claim"). Ala.Rule App.Proc. 39(k) ("In imposed, supreme notice plain defect review, thereof, whenever adversely affected petitioner"); Rev.Stat.Ann. 43-2725 [is present], prejudical appellant"); Cave State, 476 So.2d 180, (Fla.1985) (In "[w]e will, course, continue Florida 9.140(f)"); Unified Appeal B(2) each assertions proceedings assertion motion new enumerated Court"); Osborn, Idaho 405, 410-411, 631 187, 192-193 (1981) ("Death [might] [Idaho Code] 19-2827 mandates examine procedure followed imposing taken. indicates ignore unchallenged errors. gravity infrequency outweighs rationale proposed below"); People Holman, Ill.2d 133, 176, Ill.Dec. 585, 606, 469 N.E.2d 119, 140 (1984) ("Ordinarily, jury"), 1220, 347 Lowery 478 1214, 1229 (Ind.1985) Motion Correct Errors results waiver questions"); Ice 667 S.W.2d 671, (Ky.1984) ("[I]n considered, court"), 860, 192, 125 Hamilton, 123, 127, (La.1985) reviewed assignments contemporaneous order 'render[ed] unreliable,' avoiding counsel"); Nave, 694 729, 735 (Mo.1985) ("Several states preserved codified Missouri 29.11(d) exceptions here, inapplicable assignment improperly ex gratia, injustice Nave's continuance"); McKenna, Pa. 428, 440-441, 383 A.2d 174, 181 ("Because irrevocable finality, fixed reproach. exalted lofty blind issue—the allowing illegal execution"); Patterson, 278 S.C. 319, 320-321, 295 264, 264-265 ("On reviews entire favorem vitae, review"); Brown, 607 261, (Utah 1980) ("[N]o omission. recognizes obligations attendant reviewing penalties providing automatic 17-110.1A (1982), giving priority docket, 17-110.2. Some Courts interpret statutes obligation transcript Prosecutor's Closing Argument Sentencing Phase, 30-31 ("Now, said, you instructed fix case—proved history acts violence continuous Now, proved? yesterday, assaulted He it. Tore off, it"). rejection stands sharp contrast analysis: "I don't police officer Miranda." 5. argues distinguishable examination. account "agent State" sense agent State. 467, 1875 Grigson went reporting competence crucial respondent's dangerousness, changed became essentially like recounting unwarned postarrest setting"). amici, turn, argue assist absolute guarantee confidentiality, Miranda required. They contend confidentiality especially important effectuate due consult Since, minimum, disclosure circumstances. least right. whether, acting transformation "But struck down Arnold [236 Ga. 539-542, 224 386, 391-392 (1976) ] distinguishing imposed. nn. 16, phase. ." "Thus, respondent assaultive offenses, concedes been, adduced subject defendant." 886-887, 2747-2748 continued: "Our depends existence safeguard, mandatory avoid arbitrariness assure proportionality. automatically reversal having assured arbitrary capricious. [Zant Stephens 250 Ga., [97] 297 [1], 4. response certified stated: 'A otherwise thereafter failed.' Ibid." 890, 2749

Category: 0