Right to Counsel and Plea Bargaining: Gideon's Legacy Continues

• Author: Lahny R. Silva
• Position: Associate Professor of Law, Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law
• Pages: 2219-2244

2219

Right to Counsel and Plea Bargaining:

Gideon’s Legacy Continues

Lahny R. Silva

INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 2220

I. THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL ..................................................................... 2221

A. EFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE ................................................................... 2223

1. Strickland v. Washington ........................................................ 2223

2. Hill v. Lockhart ....................................................................... 2225

B. “CRITICAL STAGE” ......................................................................... 2226

1. United States v. Wade .............................................................. 2226

2. Coleman v. Alabama ............................................................... 2228

3. Rothgery v. Gillespie County ..................................................... 2229

II. CONTEMPORARY ISSUES IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE ..................................... 2230

A. INDIGENT DEFENSE ......................................................................... 2230

B. MEET ‘EM AND PLEAD ‘EM .............................................................. 2231

C. AMERICA’S INCARCERATION CRISIS ................................................. 2232

D. SUMMARY ...................................................................................... 2234

III. THE PLEA-BARGAINING TRILOGY ......................................................... 2234

A. PADILLA V. KENTUCKY .................................................................. 2234

B. MISSOURI V. FRYE ......................................................................... 2235

C. LAFLER V. COOPER ....................................................................... 2237

D. IN DISSENT .................................................................................... 2237

IV. CONTINUING GIDEON’S LEGACY: PRINCIPLES AND ENFORCEMENT ....... 2238

A. CRITICAL STAGE............................................................................. 2239

B. EFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL ................................................ 2240

C. A REALISTIC ASSESSMENT ............................................................... 2241

 Associate Professor of Law, Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law. I

would like to thank the participants in the Iowa Law Review Symposium, celebrating the fiftieth

anniversary of the Gideon decision, for their encouragement and feedback. I would also like to

extend a special thanks to my faculty at the Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of

Law for their extensive assistance with the development of this Essay. Thank you, Florence

Roisman, Dean Norman Lefstein, and Carlton Waterhouse. And finally, a warm thank you to

the Iowa Law Review for their hospitality and patience.

2220 IOWA LAW REVIEW [Vol. 99:2219

D. IMPLEMENTATION AND ENFORCEMENT ............................................ 2241

1. The Dissent ........................................................................... 2242

2. Burt v. Titlow ......................................................................... 2243

E. SUMMARY ...................................................................................... 2244

V. CONCLUSION ....................................................................................... 2244

INTRODUCTION

Throughout the twentieth century, the United States Supreme Court

addressed questions regarding the Sixth Amendment right to counsel.

Beginning in 1963 with the watershed decision of Gideon v. Wainwright,1

right to counsel jurisprudence has developed and evolved into an

interestingly complicated body of law. Initially, Gideon was hailed as a victory

for human-rights advocates and promised a hopeful change in the

administration of criminal justice.

Today, Gideon’s legacy faces new challenges. With indigent defense

declared “shamefully inadequate” by the American Bar Association (“ABA”)

and the American brand of justice considered “‘a system of pleas,’”2 the

Supreme Court has grappled with the jurisprudential reach of Gideon. In the

plea-bargaining trilogy—Padilla v. Kentucky,3 Missouri v. Frye,4 and Lafler v.

Cooper5—the Court wrestled with a number of questions concerning the

right to effective assistance of counsel in the plea-bargaining context. While

these decisions appear to comport with the principles espoused in Gideon, a

closer look reveals that the plea-bargaining trilogy will likely suffer a fate

similar to Gideon: problems in implementation and enforcement.

This Essay argues that the principles espoused in Padilla, Frye, and Lafler

are a natural extension of the modern understanding of Gideon. However, as

in Gideon, the Court declined to provide guidance on implementation and

enforcement of these plea-bargaining principles. Absent such guidance, the

constitutional protections advanced in the plea-bargaining cases will

probably not be realized.

Part I of this Essay discusses the modern understanding of Gideon,

particularly in the plea-bargaining context, thereby providing a basis on

which to evaluate the principles announced in Padilla, Frye, and Lafler. Part II

offers an overview of the current state of criminal justice in America—the

context underlying the plea-bargaining trilogy. Focusing on indigent

1. Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963).

2. Missouri v. Frye, 132 S. Ct. 1399, 1407 (2012) (quoting Lafler v. Cooper, 132 S. Ct.

1376, 1388) (2012)).

3. Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356 (2010).

4. Frye, 132 S. Ct. 1399.

5. Lafler, 132 S. Ct. 1376.