Document: 400 U.S. 25 91 S.Ct. 160 27 L.Ed.2d 162 NORTH CAROLINAv.Henry C. ALFORD. No. 14. Argued Nov. 17, 1969. Reargued Oct. 14, 1970. Decided 23, Syllabus Appellee was indicted for the capital crime of first-degree murder. At that time North Carolina law provided penalty life imprisonment when a plea guilty accepted to murder charge; death following jury verdict guilty, unless recommended imprisonment; and from two 30 years' second-degree Appellee's attorney, in face strong evidence guilt, plea, but left decision appellee. The prosecutor agreed accept trial court heard damaging certain witnesses before accepting plea. pleaded although disclaiming because threat penalty, sentenced imprisonment. Court Appeals, on an appeal denial writ habeas corpus, found appellee's involuntary it motivated principally by fear penalty. Held: judge did not commit constitutional error Pp. 31-39. (a) A represents voluntary intelligent choice among alternatives available defendant, especially one represented competent counsel, is compelled within meaning Fifth Amendment entered avoid possibility Brady v. United States, 397 742, 90 1463, 747. (b) Hudson 272 451, 47 127, 71 L.Ed. 347, which held federal may impose prison sentence after nolo contendere, implicitly recognized there no bar imposing upon accused who unwilling admit guilt willing waive sentence. 35-36. (c) An voluntarily, knowingly, understandingly consent imposition even though he participation crime, or if his contains protestation innocence, when, as here, intelligently concludes interests require record strongly evidences guilt. 37-38. (d) Fourteenth Bill Rights do prohibit States pleas lesser-in-cluded offenses. P. 39. 405 F.2d 340, vacated remanded. Jacob L. Safron, Raleigh, N.C., appellant. Doris R. Bray, Greensboro, Mr. Justice WHITE delivered opinion Court. 1 On December 2, 1963, Alford murder, offense under law.1 appointed attorney represent him, this questioned all various appellee said would substantiate claim innocence. witnesses, however, support Alford's story gave statements indicated Faced with substantial evidentiary plead ultimate himself. charge 10, reduced charge. 2 Before finally court, sworn testimony police officer summarized State's case. Two other besides were also heard. Although eyewitness shortly killing took gun house, stated intention kill victim, returned home declaration had carrier out killing. After summary presentation case, stand testified committed pleading faced so.2 In response questions acknowledged counsel informed him difference between second- rights case chose go trial.3 then asked if, light still desired answered, 'Yes, sir. I on—from circumstances (Alford's attorney) told me.' eliciting information about prior criminal record, long one,4 imprisonment, maximum murder.5 3 sought post-conviction relief state court. Among claims raised invalid product coercion. hearing, 1965 'willingly, understandingly' made advice prosecution Subsequently, petitioned first District Middle Carolina, Appeals Fourth Circuit. Both courts denied basis court's findings voluntarily knowingly guilty. 1967, again corpus Carolina. That without grounds waived defenses nonjurisdictional defects any stage proceedings clearly required rejection effective assistance appeal, divided panel Circuit reversed ground involuntarily. 340 (1968). reaching its conclusion, relied heavily Jackson, 390 570, 88 1209, 20 138 (1968), read invalidation statutory framework statutes encouraged defendants promise more than offered accepted. Conceding Jackson automatic statutes, ruled principal motivation By standard, both possessed power charges been permitted, should have rejected impermissibly induced desire eliminate sentence.6 We noted probable jurisdiction. 394 956, 89 1306, 22 558 (1969). vacate judgment remand further proceedings. 4 747 (1970), except defendant's possible limit term years reason Amendment. established new test determining validity pleas. standard remains whether alternative courses action open defendant. See Boykin Alabama, 395 238, 242, 1709, 1711, 23 274 (1969); Machibroda 368 487, 493, 82 510, 513, 7 473 (1962); Kercheval 220, 223, 582, 583, 1009 (1927). opportunity does necessarily demonstrate free rational choice, where defendant whose be advantage. fashioned applied therefore erroneous we would, more, respect are properly appearing might seem warrant affirmance Appeals. 5 As previously recounted placed judge, reaffirmed 30-year Ordinarily, conviction resting justified admission charged against kind. usually subsumes elements, justifiably so, separate, express particular acts claimed constitute indictment. supra, at 748, 1468; McCarthy 459, 466, 1166, 1170, 418 Here accompanied statement shot victim. 6 If credited sincere assertions obviously existed factual legal dispute State. Without argued invalid, since assertion innocence negatived which, observed last Term Brady, normally '(c) entral foundation entering * *.' U.S., S.Ct., 1468. addition statement, account events night including acquaintances departed stating later declared carried intention. Nor wavered determine trial. denying nevertheless preferred State settled context proceeding rather formal Thereupon, telling it, proceeded convict 8 lower can protestations hence only waiver Some courts, giving expression principle '(o)ur authorizes shown,' Harris State, 76 Tex.Cr.R. 126, 131, 172 S.W. 975, 977 (1915), judges reject such See, e.g., Hulsey 369 284, 287 (CA5 1966); ex rel. Elksnis Gilligan, 256 F.Supp. 244, 255 257 (SDNY People Morrison, 348 Mich. 88, 81 N.W.2d 667 (1957); Reali, 26 N.J. 222, 139 A.2d 300 (1958); Leyba, 80 N.M. 190, 193, 453 P.2d 211, 214 Stacy, 43 Wash.2d 358, 361—364, 261 400, 402—403 (1953). But others concluded they 'force defense case,' particularly advancement 'end disaster Tremblay Overholser, 199 569, 570 (DC 1961). They that, 'guilt, degree times uncertain elusive,' '(a)n accused, believing entertaining doubts respecting reasonably conclude convinced fare better McCoy 124 U.S.App.D.C. 177, 179, 363 306, 308 (1966). nearly century ago, '(r)easons fact induce so plead, (and) (h)e must permitted himself respect.' Kaufman, 51 Iowa 578, 580, N.W. 275, 276 (1879) (dictum). Accord, Griffin 132 108, 1378 (1968); Bruce 126 336, 342—343, 379 113, 119—120 (1967); City Burbank General Electric Co., 329 825, 835 (CA9 1964) (dictum); Martinez, Idaho 129 138, 403 597, 602—603 (1965); Hetherington, Ill. 71, 39 N.E.2d 361 (1942); Crossley Tahash, 263 Minn. 299, 307—308, 116 666, 672 Commonwealth Cottrell, 433 Pa. 249 294 Cf. Brown LaVallee, 424 457 (CA2 1970).7 9 This has confronted precise issue, decisions yield relevant principles. Lynch 705, 1063, 211 (1962), Lynch, Municipal Columbia drawing negotiating bad checks, misdemeanor punishable year jail, enter refused psychiatric report judge's possession suffering 'a manic depressive psychosis, charged,' insanity. subsequent rely insanity defense, indeterminate period mental institution. ordered release, construing congressional legislation seemingly authorizing commitment expressly rule absolute right accepted, see id., 719, 1072, implied valid defense. 10 issue 347 (1926), nonetheless waives purposes treat guilty.8 power, cases Hudson,9 uniformly followed rule, involving moral turpitude. U.S.App.D.C., 343 n. 20, F.2d, 120 Lott 367 421, 1563, 940 (1961) (fraudulent evasion income tax); Sullivan 170, 75 182, 99 210 (1954) (ibid.); Farnsworth Zerbst, 98 541 1938) (espionage); Pharr 48 767 (CA6 1931) (misapplication bank funds); Bagliore, 182 714 (EDNY 1960) (receiving stolen property). Implicit contendere recognition Constitution who, grim alternatives, 11 These directly point simply insisted crime. denominated significance now us, concerned practical consequences, categorizations, law. Smith Bennett, 365 708, 712, 895, 897, (1961); Jones 362 257, 266, 725, 733, 697 (1960). Kermarec Compagnie Generale Transatlantique, 358 625, 630—632, 79 406, 409—411, 550 (1959). Thus, while most consist latter element requisite individual unable constituting 12 perceive material refuses commission act containing instant entry actual Alford. Whether realized disbelieved view absolutely nothing gain much pleading. Because overwhelming precisely what neither nor desired. Confronted hand, other, quite thereby limited term. When viewed substantially negated means could being entered, 466—467, 1170—1171 (1969),10 cannot seriously questioned. demonstrated expressed despite professed belief hold it.11 13 Relying argues effect allowed proving degree. their wisdom take course statute otherwise practice lesser included offenses circumstances.12 mandate Rights. prohibitions unintelligent relaxed, exercise arid logic render those guarantees counterproductive put jeopardy very human values meant preserve. 14 find directing issuance remanded consistent opinion. 15 It ordered. 16 Vacated 17 BLACK, adhering wrongly decided, concurs 18 BRENNAN, whom DOUGLAS MARSHALL join, dissenting. 19 Last Term, held, over my dissent, validly unconstitutional subject risk death, aware threat, albeit unconstitutionality. 745 758, 1467—1474, (1970); Parker 790, 795, 1458, 1461, 785 (1970). Today makes clear previous holding intended apply demonstrates adhere given influence 'must weight voluntariness plea.' 805, 1458 (dissent). And, question due process permits contemporaneous crime,1 believe least factor made. With these factors mind, sufficient facts set majority 'so gripped penalty'2 'the duress reflecting physical constraint.' Haley Ohio, 332 596, 606, 68 302, 307, 92 224 (1948) (opinion Frankfurter, J.). Accordingly, affirm Under law, punished recommends punishment shall imprisonment: 'A perpetrated poison, lying wait, starving, torture, kind willful, deliberate premeditated killing, perpetration attempt perpetrate arson, rape, robbery, burglary felony, deemed death: Provided, rendering recommend, prison, instruct jury. All kinds second degree, less thirty prison.' N.C.Gen.Stat. § 14—17 death. provision permitting repealed 792—795, 1460—1461, Though present charge, person version stated: 'I too evidence, ain't man, fault man. never argument our just didn't gas all.' affirmed consulted several members family murder: 'Q. (by attorney). And you authorized me tender court? 'A. Yes, doing your point? Well, I'm got way, circumstantial evidence; will prosecute on—on second. You right. don't—I'm guilty.' hearing relief, confirmed fully consequences Since affirmatively indicates issues substance (1969), presented applicable here question. sentenced, convictions. answered things, served six ten-year convicted nine armed transporting goods, forgery, carrying concealed weapon. App. 9—11. 1, supra. Thus same way 1969 repealed, result reached reasoning. third approach decline definitively either leave sound discretion. Maxwell 735, 738—739 1966). Courts defined variety different ways, describing 'in effect, guilty,' Food & Grocery Bureau, 974, 979 (SD Cal.1942), aff'd, 973 1943), query directed Hopkins, Del. A. (1913). generally 426 427, 1566—1567, (1961), 427—430, 1567—1569 (Clark, J., dissenting); 21 Am.Jur.2d, Criminal Law 497. result, impossible enters consistently fit cases. ambiguous. place, called 'an 455, 129, another, quoted English authority 'where capital, doth own Id., 453, 128, quoting W. Hawkins, Pleas Crown 466 (8th ed. 1824). originated early medieval wishing seek make end matter (finem facere) offering pay sum money king. F. Pollock Maitland, History 517 (2d 1909). 15th-century compromise, merely 'that grace Lord, King, fine (petit se admittit per finem).' Anon., Y.B.Hil., Hen. 6, f. 59, pl. (1431). 16th-century 'putteth hym selfe Gratiam Reginae anye Protestation hee guiltie *,' Lambard, Eirenarcha 427 (1581), 18th-century distinguished noting former introduce mitigation punishment, whereas precluded finding Queen Templeman, Salk. 55, Eng.Rep. 54 (K.B.1702). Throughout history, is, prayer leniency. Fed.Rule Crim.Proc. preserves distinction requirement 'unless satisfied plea'; similar thought desirable permit making inquiry into Notes Advisory Committee Rule 11. Blum 196 269 (CA7 1912); Shapiro 268 Tucker 260 1912). importance protecting innocent insuring caution coupled see, App.D.C. 110, 1378, 1380 342, 119 until taking inquired resolve conflict Serrano, N.Y.2d 304, 308—309, 258 N.Y.S.2d 386, 388—389, 206 330, Branner, 149 N.C. 559, 563, 63 S.E. 169, 171 (1908). Kreuter 201 33, 36 (CA10 1952). provides 'shall Our mean every constitutionally wishes plead. implication), confer Likewise, assert 11, gives discretion 'refuse need delineate scope longer appears appeals varying opinions Compare 179—180, 308—309 (1966); 342 109—110, 1379—1380 739 1966) (court guilt), Crosby Brierley, 404 801—802 (CA3 1968); Bailey MacDougall, 392 155, 158 (CA4 (guilty infirm elements offense). 750, 1470.

Category: 0