Supreme Court to Weigh Effects of Bad Plea Advice

[alp227]

Source: NY Times

Anthony Cooper shot a woman in Detroit in 2003 and then received laughably bad legal advice. Because all four of his bullets had struck the victim below her waist, his lawyer said, Mr. Cooper could not be convicted of assault with intent to murder.

Based on that advice, Mr. Cooper rejected a plea bargain that called for a sentence of four to seven years. Later he was convicted, and he is serving 15 to 30 years.

At least Mr. Cooper heard about his plea offer. Galin E. Frye’s lawyer never told him that prosecutors in Missouri were willing to let him plead guilty to a misdemeanor and serve 90 days in prison for driving without a license. When Mr. Frye did plead guilty after the offer expired, a judge sentenced him to three years.

On Monday, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in the two cases, which ask how principles concerning bad legal work at trial should apply to plea bargains. The question is of surpassing importance, since a large majority of criminal cases are settled at the plea stage.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/31/us/supreme-court-to-hear-cases-involving-bad-advice-on-plea-deals.html

[no_hypocrisy]

1. The conviction should be reversed.

Cooper never had the opportunity to fully participate in his defense as he was never informed about the 90 days plea deal. It's a constitutional question because his attorney denied Cooper the right to counsel.

[krispos42]

2. Not Cooper... the other person (Fry?) had the driving arrest

Cooper could have served 7 instead of 15.


Of course, for shooting somebody, I'd want to give him the full 15!

[no_hypocrisy]

3. Duly noted. You're correct.

[PoliticAverse]

5. If Frye never was informed about the deal he seems to have gotten unacceptable counsel.

[reACTIONary]

4. Maybe they ought to lock up the laywers who screwed up...

...make them serve in the same prison as their clients!

[rocktivity]

6. Mr. Frye has a legitimate gripe; Mr. Cooper does not.

If Cooper didn't know that the abdomen and spine are below the waist, he should have. And unless Cooper's case was based on denying that he was the shooter, it's not his lawyer's fault if he concluded he therefore wouldn't be convicted of ANYTHING.

:crazy:
rocktivity

[happyslug]

7. Here are the Briefs, if you want to read them.

The Various briefs by ALL Sides in this dispute:
Lafler vs Cooper: (Supreme Court Docket # 10-209)
http://www.americanbar.org/publications/preview_home/10-209.html

Missouri vs Frye: (Supreme Court Docket # 10-444)
http://www.americanbar.org/publications/preview_home/10-444.html


The California Law Review article cited in the Article:
http://www.californialawreview.org/assets/pdfs/99-4/05_Bibas.pdf