John Marshall, Warden v. Otis Lee Rodgers (569 U.S. 58)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided April 1, 2013 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 569 U.S. 58 · 133 S. Ct. 1446
- Decided
- April 1, 2013
- Term
- October Term 2012
- Vote
- 9–0
- Issue area
- Civil Rights
- Disposition
- Reversed and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
PER CURIAM. Respondent Otis Lee Rodgers, challenging his state conviction, sought a writ of habeas corpus from the United States District Court for the Central District of California. He claimed the state courts violated his Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel by declining to appoint an attorney to assist in filing a motion for a new trial notwithstanding his three prior waivers of the right to counseled representation. The District Court denied respondent's petition, and he appealed to the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which granted habeas relief. 678 F.3d 1149, 1163 (2012). Because the Court of Appeals erred in concluding that respondent's claim is supported by "clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States," 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1), its judgment must be reversed. I In 2001, the State of California charged respondent with making criminal threats, assault with a firearm, and being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition. Before his arraignment, respondent executed a valid waiver of his Sixth Amendment right to counsel, electing to represent himself. See Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 807, 95 S.Ct. 2525, 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975). By the time of his preliminary hearing, however, respondent changed his mind and retained counsel. Then, two months later, he fired his lawyer and again waived his…
Excerpt of a 12,946-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.