Garcia v. Louisiana
Petition for certiorari denied on June 24, 2013
Issue: (1) Whether the Court should modify Mickens v. Taylor to apply the automatic reversal rule in Holloway v. Arkansas where (a) the prosecution advises a trial court that the appointment of a particular lawyer in a capital case to represent multiple defendants may create a conflict of interest; (b) the appointed lawyer informs the court that he is financially unable to appoint capitally certified counsel for each of the co-defendants; (c) the court acknowledges these conflicts of interest, but delegates resolution of them to the same lawyer; (d) the conflicted attorney then advocates in a manner intended to prevent death sentences for the co-defendants; and (e) the trial court declines to intervene; and (2) whether the Louisiana Supreme Court"s opinion finding no "actual conflict" in this case demonstrates the need for this Court to address the split in the Circuit Courts concerning the standard for determining whether "an actual conflict of interest adversely affected [a] lawyer"s performance" and thereby settle an important question of federal constitutional law.
Date | Proceedings and Orders |
---|---|
04/25/2013 | Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due May 31, 2013) |
05/30/2013 | Brief of respondent Louisiana in opposition filed. |
05/31/2013 | Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by Ethics Bureau at Yale. |
06/04/2013 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 20, 2013. |
06/04/2013 | Reply of petitioner Michael Garcia filed. (Distributed) |
06/24/2013 | Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by Ethics Bureau at Yale GRANTED. |
06/24/2013 | Petition DENIED. |