Supreme Court Recap

Now that the Supreme Court's 2010 term has come to a close, here's a quick recap of the outcomes of the lawyering cases.  You may recall that the term opened with five cases involving the law of lawyering on the docket, and we've ended up with a total of eight by my count. 

1. Harrington v. Richter.  The Court reversed the Ninth Circuit's finding of ineffective assistance of counsel, where the defense attorney used cross-examination and other methods to create reasonable doubt rather than expert testimony and forensic evidence about blood found at the murder scene.
2. Premo v. Moore.  Here, the Court reversed the Ninth Circuit again and found no ineffective assistance of counsel where the defense attorney did not move to suppress a coerced confession. 
3. Los Angeles County v. Humphries.  In yet another reversal of the Ninth Circuit, the Court overturned attorney's fees awarded under 42 U.S.C. section 1983. 
4. Connick v. Thompson. The Court overturned the $14 million jury award for a former death row inmate who spent 18 years in prison, released after prosecutorial misconduct was revealed.  Dahlia Lithwick at Slate called it "one of the meanest Supreme Court decisions ever" in Cruel but not Unusual.
5. Cullen v. Pinholster. The Court determined that counsel was not ineffective in failing to consult with an additional psychiatrist and more family members to produce sufficient mitigating evidence.  Erwin Chemerinsky wrote that this decision demonstrates how the "Court is aggressively curtailing access to the judicial system" in this NLJ piece, Closing the Courthouse Doors.
6. Ashcroft v. al-Kidd. The Court found that then-Attorney General Ashcroft was entitled to qualified immunity in the use of the federal material witness warrant as a tool for preventative detention and investigation of terrorist suspects.
7. Fox v. Vice. Fox addressed the award of attorney's fees under a fee-shifting statute in civil rights litigation involving frivilous and nonfrivilous claims, and the Court held that reasonable fees may be granted to the defendant only for those costs that the defendant would not have incurred but for the frivolous claims.
8. Turner v. Price. In Turner (aka the Civil Gideon case), the Court held that indigent, noncustodial parents subject to a child support order are not constitutionally entitled to counsel at a civil contempt proceeding, even if the parent faces jail time.  Concurring Opinions held a symposium on the decision with a number of thought-provoking posts, including Bruce Green's A Professional Responsibility Perspective.

And we can start looking forward to lawyering cases in the 2011 Term:

• Missouri v. Frye and Lafler v. Cooper. These cases involve separate appeals but are linked together because they address the same issue:  whether bad advice from a lawyer during plea negotiations may impact a subsequent guilty verdict.  Frye's attorney neglected to inform him about two deals offered by prosecutors before he pled guilty.  Cooper was advised against taking a plea deal by his attorney only to be found guilty. 
• Maples v. Thomas. In Maples the Court will consider whether the petitioner's failure to appeal a decision because it was sent to his attorneys at an address where they no longer worked constitutes cause to excuse procedural default.  Adam Liptak provides the details in his NYT article, A Mailroom Mix-Up That Could Cost a Life.
• Smith v. Louisiana. This case presents the Court another opportunity to weigh in on prosecutorial misconduct out of the District Attorney's office in Orleans Parish (the same source in Connick v. Thompson).  Alberto Bernabe weighs in on this cert grant here at his Professional Responsibility Blog.
• Martinez v. Ryan. In Martinez, the Court will consider whether a criminal defendant has a right to effective assistance of first post-conviction counsel specifically with respect to his ineffective-assistance-of-trial-counsel claim.