Terry Stewart, Director, Arizona Department of Corrections, et al. v. Walter Lagrand (526 U.S. 115)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided March 3, 1999 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 526 U.S. 115 · 119 S. Ct. 1018
- Decided
- March 3, 1999
- Term
- October Term 1998
- Vote
- 8–1
- Issue area
- Criminal Procedure
- Disposition
- Reversed
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
Per Curiam. Walter LaGrand and Karl LaGrand were each convicted of first-degree murder, attempted murder in the first degree, attempted armed robbery, and two counts of kidnaping. The Arizona Supreme Court gave a detailed account of the crime in Walter LaGrand’s appeal. See State v. LaGrand, 153 Ariz. 21, 23-24, 734 P. 2d 563, 565-566 (1987). Following a jury trial, both Karl LaGrand and Walter LaGrand were convicted on all charges and sentenced to death. The Arizona Supreme Court affirmed the convictions and sentences. State v. LaGrand, 152 Ariz. 483, 733 P. 2d 1066 (1987) (Karl LaGrand); State v. LaGrand, supra (Walter LaGrand). Subsequently, we denied the LaGrands’ petitions for certiorari. See 484 U. S. 872 (1987). The LaGrands then filed petitions corpus pursuant to 28 U. S. C. §2254. Until then, Walter LaGrand had been represented by Bruce Burke, a Tucson lawyer. Before appointing Burke as counsel in the habeas proceeding, however, the District Court required Burke to discuss all possible claims of ineffective assistance of counsel with Walter LaGrand and to file a status report with the court. See 133 F. 3d 1253, 1269 (CA9 1998). Walter La-Grand informed Burke that he did not desire a new attorney and requested that Burke continue to represent him. Ibid. Nevertheless, after Burke learned that Karl LaGrand was pursuing ineffective-assistanee-of-counsel claims, Burke…
Excerpt of a 9,604-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.