The right to effective assistance of counsel is a cornerstone of the American justice system. Defendants rely on their attorneys to provide competent representation throughout their legal proceedings, including during plea negotiations. However, there are instances when a defendant might believe that they received ineffective plea agreement assistance. In this blog post, well explore how a defendant can receive, identify, and address ineffective plea agreement assistance during plea negotiations, and provide insights into relevant case law for those seeking to argue their case.
The Importance of Effective Assistance of Counsel
Before we delve into identifying and addressing ineffective plea agreement assistance, its crucial to understand why effective assistance is fundamental. The Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution guarantees every criminal defendant the right to effective assistance of counsel. This right ensures that defendants have legal representation that meets certain standards of competence and diligence.
In the context of plea agreements, effective assistance from counsel is vital because it profoundly impacts a defendant’s decision making process. A competent attorney should provide advice allowing a defendant to make an informed choice regarding whether to accept an offered plea deal or proceed to trial. When counsel’s assistance falls short, it can lead to serious consequences for the defendant.
Recognizing Ineffective Plea Agreement Assistance
To address ineffective assistance of counsel (IAC) occurring during the plea agreement process, a defendant must first recognize it. Ineffective plea agreement assistance typically involves an attorney’s failure to perform at a level meeting professional standards. While each case is unique, some of these common scenarios may indicate ineffective assistance:
Lack of Communication
Effective communication between the attorney and a defendant is essential. If the attorney fails to keep their client informed about the progress of the case, the implications of the plea deal, or potential consequences, it may be a sign of ineffective plea agreement assistance.
Failure to Investigate
Attorneys are expected to conduct a reasonable investigation into the case, gather evidence, interview witnesses, and explore potential defenses. If the attorney fails to do so, it may indicate ineffective plea agreement assistance.
Coercion or Misleading Advice
If an attorney pressures a defendant into accepting a plea deal, provides misleading information, or fails to explain the plea agreement clearly, it could be considered ineffective plea agreement assistance.
Failure to Advise on Consequences
In cases where a non-citizen defendant faces deportation consequences, the attorney’s failure to advise on immigration consequences may constitute ineffective plea agreement assistance. Its important to note counsel is not obligated to inform the defendant of every collateral consequence in accepting the plea agreement. For example, in most jurisdictions the attorney would not be found ineffective for failing to inform their client of the requirement to register as a sex offender, after pleading guilty to a crime involving some form of sexual offense.
The Leading Case on Ineffective Assistance of Counsel
The landmark case providing the framework for evaluating claims of ineffective assistance of counsel is Strickland v. Washington, 104 S.Ct. 2052 (1984). In this case, the U.S. Supreme Court established a two-part test that a defendant must meet to successfully argue their counsel was ineffective:
- Deficient Performance: A defendant must demonstrate that their attorney’s performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness. This means showing that the attorney’s actions or omissions were so significant that they deprived the defendant of a fair trial.
- Prejudice: In addition to deficient performance, a defendant must prove their attorney’s shortcomings resulted in prejudice. In the context of plea agreements, this means establishing that, but for the attorney’s errors, the defendant would have chosen a different course of action (e.g. gone to trial rather than accepting the plea agreement).
Strickland sets a high bar for proving ineffective assistance of counsel, as it requires both deficient performance and prejudice to the defendant. However, it provides a clear framework for evaluating claims of ineffective plea agreement assistance.
The Leading Case on Ineffective Plea Agreement Assistance
The landmark case providing the prejudice standard for evaluating claims of ineffective plea agreement assistance is Hill v. Lockhart, 106 S.Ct. 366 (1985). The Court therein held that when a defendant claims his counsel’s deficient performance deprived him of a trial by causing him to accept a plea agreement, the defendant can show prejudice by demonstrating a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s errors, he would not have pleaded guilty and would have insisted on going to trial.
Remedies for Ineffective Plea Agreement Assistance
If a defendant believes they received ineffective plea agreement assistance, they can pursue post-conviction remedies. These remedies are legal mechanisms allowing defendants to challenge their convictions or sentences based on the claim of ineffective plea agreement assistance. Here are a few common post-conviction remedies:
Direct Appeal
In some jurisdictions, a defendant may raise the issue of ineffective plea agreement assistance through a direct appeal. If the appellate court finds merit in the claim, it may overturn the conviction or send the case back for a new trial.
Habeas Corpus Petition
A habeas corpus petition is a legal action that allows a defendant to challenge their detention or conviction. Defendants can file a habeas corpus petition in federal or state court, arguing that their constitutional rights were violated due to ineffective plea agreement assistance.
Section 2255 Motion (Federal Defendants)
In federal cases, defendants can file a motion under 28 U.S.C. §2255 to challenge their conviction or sentence. This motion can include claims of ineffective plea agreement assistance.
State Post-Conviction Proceedings
Each state has its own procedures for post-conviction relief. Defendants can typically file a petition in state court, alleging that they received ineffective assistance of counsel during their plea agreement process.
Successful Ineffective Plea Agreement Assistance Cases
To provide insight into how claims of ineffective plea agreement assistance played out in real-life cases, let’s look at a couple of examples:
Missouri v. Frye
In Missouri v. Frye, 132 S.Ct. 1399 (2012), the defendant’s attorney failed to communicate a plea offer to the defendant, resulting in the offer’s expiration. The defendant subsequently received a harsher sentence at trial. The U.S. Supreme court held that the attorney’s deficient performance constituted ineffective assistance, as it deprived the defendant of a favorable plea offer.
Lafler v. Cooper
In Lafler v. Cooper, 132 S.Ct. 1376 (2012), the defendant’s attorney advised him to reject a plea deal, assuring him that the prosecution had a weak case. The defendant went to trial and received a much harsher sentence. The Supreme Court ruled that the attorney’s advice was constitutionally deficient, and that the defendant was entitled to a new plea offer.
Padilla v. Kentucky
In Padilla v. Kentucky, 130 S.Ct. 1473 (2010), the defendant’s attorney failed to advise him that if he accepted the plea deal, he would be subject to automatic deportation. The Court held that Padilla’s defense counsel’s actions fell below reasonable professional standards and remanded the case back to state court for a determination on the prejudice prong of Strickland v. Washington.
My Final Thoughts
The right to effective plea agreement assistance is a fundamental aspect of the criminal justice system, ensuring that defendants receive competent representation at every stage of their legal proceedings, including plea negotiations. Recognizing ineffective plea agreement assistance and pursuing post-conviction remedies, allows defendants to seek justice when their constitutional rights are violated. Understanding these principles is vital for safeguarding the integrity of the legal system and ensuring fair outcomes for all defendants.
If you, or someone you know entered into, or are considering entering into, a plea agreement, our book, The Colossal Book of Criminal Citations, contains sections dedicated to the topics of plea agreements and ineffective assistance of counsel. Our books are softcover and institution friendly. Order your copy today, or on behalf of someone incarcerated.