Document: 397 U.S. 742 90 S.Ct. 1463 25 L.Ed.2d 747 Robert M. BRADY, Petitioner,v.UNITED STATES. No. 270. Argued Nov. 18, 1969. Decided May 4, 1970. Peter J. Adang, Albuquerque, N.M., for petitioner. Joseph Connolly, Washington, D.C., respondent. Mr. Justice WHITE delivered the opinion of Court. 1 In 1959, petitioner was charged with kidnaping in violation 18 U.S.C. § 1201(a).1 Since indictment that victim not liberated unharmed, faced a maximum penalty death if verdict jury should so recommend. Petitioner, represented by competent counsel throughout, first elected to plead guilty. Apparently because trial judge unwilling try case without jury, made no serious attempt reduce possibility waiving trial. Upon learning his codefendant, who had confessed authorities, would guilty and be available testify against him, changed plea His accepted after twice questioned him as voluntariness plea.2 Petitioner sentenced 50 years' imprisonment, later reduced 30. 2 1967, sought relief under 28 2255, claiming voluntarily given 1201(a) operated coerce plea, exerted impermissible pressure upon induced representations respect reduction sentence clemency. It also alleged fully complied Rule 11 Federal Rules Criminal Procedure.3 3 After hearing, District Court New Mexico denied relief. According Court's findings, petitioner's did put on were or The court held constitutional found decided when he learned codefendant going guilty: pleaded 'by reason other matters statute' any acts judge. concluded 'the knowingly made.' 4 Appeals Tenth Circuit affirmed, determining findings supported substantial evidence specifically approving finding voluntary. 404 F.2d 601 (1968). We granted certiorari, 395 976, 89 2146, 23 764 (1969), consider claim error reaching contrary result authority this decision United States v. Jackson, 390 570, 88 1209, 20 138 affirm. 5 * supra, defendants indicted 1201(a). dismissed count indictment, holding statute unconstitutional it permitted imposition only jury's recommendation thereby risk price This valid, except provision; latter, agreed 'that provision imposes an burden exercise right *.' U.S., at 572, S.Ct., 1211. problem determine 'whether Constitution permits establishment such penalty, applicable those assert contest their guilt before jury.' 581, 1216. inevitable effect said discourage assertion Fifth Amendment deter Sixth demand Because legitimate goal limiting cases which recommends could achieved penalizing elect trial, 'needlessly penalize(d) right,' 583, 1217, therefore unconstitutional. 6 'inevitable effect' needless encouragement pleas waivers Brady contends Jackson requires invalidation every entered section, least fear is shown have been factor plea. however, has read far too much into opinion. 7 clear inherently coercive pleas: fact Kidnaping Act tends from insisting innocence demanding hardly implies defendant enters charge does involuntarily.' 1217. Cited support statement, 583 n. 25, Laboy Jersey, 266 F.Supp. 581 (D.C.N.J.1967), where (non vult) similar sustained voluntary spite fact, Court, greatly upset receiving penalty. 8 Moreover, rejected suggestion saved prohibiting capital all waivers, 'however (the defendants') however strong desire acknowledge order spare themselves families spectacle expense protracted courtroom proceedings.' '(T)hat may occasionally rejected' ground automatically rejecting statute, rule 'would rob criminal process its flexibility.' 584, 1218. 9 Plainly, seems us, ruled neither encouraged possible are involuntary nor invalid wheth-involuntary not. prohibits 1201(a), but fashioned new standard judging validity mandated application test theretofore courts since reiterated valid both 'voluntary' 'intelligent.' See Boykin Alabama, 238, 242, 1709, 1711—1712, 274 (1969).4 10 That grave solemn act care discernment long recognized. Central foundation entering judgment defendant's admission open committed indictment. He thus stands witness himself shielded being compelled do so—hence minimum requirement expression own choice.5 But more than past conduct; consent conviction trial—a waiver Waivers rights must knowing, intelligent done sufficient awareness relevant circumstances likely consequences.6 On score Brady's invalid. II 1959 accepting it; 1968, evidentiary made; approved voluntariness. see record disturb courts. advised counsel, tendered already confession, determined became development triggered 12 can considering surrounding it. Cf. Haynes 373 503, 513, 83 1336, 1343, 513 (1963); Leyra Denno, 347 556, 558, 74 716, 717, 98 L.Ed. 948 (1954). One these heavier following Brady, recognizing chances acquittal slight, preferred limit life imprisonment rather penalty.7 even we assume assumption merely identifies 'but for' cause caused sense necessarily prove coerced act. 13 State some degree encourages important step process. For people, breach State's law alone surrendering punishment. others, apprehension charge, threatening Government, jar them admitting guilt. still cases, post-indictment accumulation convince worth agony family. All responsibility factors motivating pleas; improperly close take stand face certain conviction. 14 Of course, agents produce actual threatened physical harm mental coercion overbearing will defendant. nothing sort claimed case; there gripped hope leniency not, help rationally weigh advantages pleading different sort: violates influence encourage opportunity promise influenced possibly higher crime obtained proof. 15 Insofar concerned, little differentiate (1) defendant, jurisdiction same range sentencing power, pleads lawyer advises very probably lenient jury; (2) normally go trial; (3) prosecutor lesser offense included charged; (4) counts understanding charges dropped. each situations,8 case, might never absent certainty imposed decline hold, whenever motivated accept probability wider possibilities extending authorized charged. 16 issue deal inherent administration constitutionally forbidden, characteristically extends choice setting individual often find advantageous preclude law. sees slight acquittal, probable obvious exposure reduced, correctional processes begin immediately, practical burdens eliminated. advantages—the promptly punishment effectively attain objectives punishment; avoidance scarce judicial prosecutorial resources conserved doubt sustain proof.9 mutuality advantage perhaps explains present well over three-fourths convictions country rest guilty,10 great many part assurance jury. 17 prevalence explainable validate system produces them. cannot hold extend benefit turn demonstrates ready willing admit enter frame mind affords success rehabilitation shorter period time otherwise necessary. A require Government forbid altogether, provide single invariable defined statutes, place function separate having knowledge manner obtained. event, necessary prosecutors judges selected counts, offenses, charges. reach far. 19 Bram States, 168 532, 183, 42 568 (1897), admissibility confession depended whether within meaning Amendment. To admissible, "free voluntary: is, extracted threats violence, direct implied promises, exertion improper influence." 542—543, 187. More recently, Malloy Hogan, 378 1, 84 1489, 653 (1964), carried forward definition compulsion course privilege self-incrimination.11 inconsistent our though promised dealt custody, unrepresented counsel. circumstances, mild deemed bar illegal such, times sensitive inducement impact ignore difficult assess. progeny dissipated presence advice Miranda Arizona, 384 436, 86 1602, 694 (1966), atmosphere police station counteracted safeguards.12 21 situation bears resemblance Bram's. guilty; prior changing subjected promises face-to-face encounters authorities. full assess disadvantages compared attending hazard impulsive improvident response seeming unreal advantage. obviously requirements pleas. unlike Bram's 22 essentially Judge Tuttle Circuit: "(A) one aware consequences, including value commitments court, prosecutor, unless (or discontinue harassment), misrepresentation (including unfulfilled unfulfillable promises), nature proper relationship prosecutor's business (e.g. bribes).' 242 page 115.'13 24 Under standard, avoid penalty.14 III us supports conclusion intelligently made. indicate incompetent control faculties; once confederate testify, chose guilty, ensure term years. precisely what doing admitted kidnaped released her unharmed. 26 true empowered impose nine years power facts set aside 27 Often heavily appraisal prosecution's apparent likelihood securing offered accepted. Considerations like frequently imponderable questions answers; judgments light events seem improvident, although they perfectly sensible time. vulnerable attack correctly decision. entitled withdraw discovers calculus misapprehended quality penalties attached alternative courses action. particularly, conduct state agents, cf. Von Moltke Gillies, 332 708, 68 316, 92 309 (1948), then become decisions rested faulty premise. expectations competently counseled subject existing pronouncements courts, question less reasonably assumed entered. anticipate impugn truth reliability disown admissions simply develops weaker thought inapplicable subsequent decisions. 29 say hazards innocent methods taking presently employed respects. mode foolproof trials Accordingly, precautions unsound results, continue so, doubts about offers substantially increased defendants, falsely condemn themselves. view based satisfy adequate accuracy defendants' crimes impeaches suggests anything truth. 30 Although convinced truthful. 31 Affirmed. 32 BLACK, while adhering belief 138, wrongly decided, concurs case. 'Whoever transports interstate foreign commerce, person unlawfully seized, confined, inveigled, decoyed, kidnaped, abducted, away ransom reward otherwise, except, minor, parent thereof, shall punished recommend, life, imposed.' Eight days brought sentencing. At time, second plea: 'THE COURT: Having presentence report statement you probation officer, I want know day. Do let stand, guilty? 'DEFENDANT BRADY: sir. You understand confessing contained voluntarily, persuasion, kind? Is right? Yes, your Honor. And that? do. charge? do.' App. 29—30. When follows: 'A or, nolo contendere. refuse charge. If refuses corporation fails appear, guilty.' amended 1966 now reads contendere addressing personally consequences satisfied factual basis plea.' McCarthy 394 459, 1166, 418 failure comply required allowed anew. Halliday 831, 1498, apply April 2, 1969, date nn. 6, infra. element added affirmatively disclose understandingly voluntarily. yet passed retroactivity requirement. Machibroda 368 487, 493, 82 510, 473 (1962); Waley Johnston, 316 101, 104, 62 964, 965—966, 1302 (1942); Walker 312 275, 286, 61 574, 579, 85 830 (1941); Chambers Florida, 227, 60 472, 716 (1940); Kercheval 220, 223, 47 582, 71 1009 (1927). Brookhart Janis, 1245, 314 (1966); Adams ex rel. McCann, 317 269, 63 236, 240, 87 268 Johnson Zerbst, 304 458, 464, 58 1019, 1023, 1461 (1938); Patton 281 276, 312, 253, 263, 854 (1930). assessment relative impossible assistance attorney, scrutinized special Pennsylvania Herman Claudy, 350 116, 76 100 126 (1956); 708 727, 325, (1948) (opinions Black Frankfurter, JJ.); Williams Kaiser, 323 471, 65 363, 398 (1945). Gideon Wainwright, 372 335, 792, 799 (1963), felony White Maryland, 59, 1050, 193 Arsenault Massachusetts, 393 5, 35, importance assuring heart recent (1969). supra. Such 2255 proceedings. here make reference judge, both, deliberately employ charging powers induce particular tender prosecution justified harsher convicted elaborate discussion justify American Bar Association Project Standards Justice, Pleas Guilty 1.8 commentary, pp. 37—52 (Approved Draft 1968). estimated 90%, 95%, between 70% 85% D. Newman, Conviction, Determination Guilt Innocence Without Trial (1966). 7, 1493, (1964). Lynumn Illinois, 528 Wilson 162 613, 622—623, 895, 899—900, 40 1090 (1896). 'The today, protective device interrogation conform dictates (against self-incrimination). insure statements government-established product compulsion.' 466, 1623 Shelton 246 571, 572 (C.A.5th Cir. 1957) (en banc), rev'd grounds, 356 26, 78 563, 579 (1958). Our regard coincide conclusions most lower federal considered involuntary. Brown LaVallee, 424 457 (C.A.2d 1970); Thomas, 415 1216 (C.A.9th 1969); Pindell 296 751 (D.C.Conn.1969); McFarland 284 969 (D.C.Md.1968), aff'd, 13,146 (C.A.4th Cir., 1969), cert. denied, 1077, 1525, 811; (D.C.N.J.1967); Gilmore California, 364 916 1966); Busby Holman, 75 Cooper Cir.), 385 855, 103, Godlock Ross, 259 659 (D.C.E.D.N.C.1966); Robinson Fay, 348 705 1965), 382 997, 484 Overman 497 (C.A.6th 1960), 993, 612, 530 Martin 256 345 358 921, 79 294, 240 Shaw 299 824 (D.C.S.D.Ga.1969); Alford North Carolina, 405 340 1968), prob. juris. noted, 956, 1306, 558 restored calendar reargument, 1060, 1494, 682.

Category: 0