Home › Case briefs › Criminal Procedure

McCoy v. Louisiana

Supreme Court of the United States · 2018 · Criminal Procedure

Criminal ProcedureSixth AmendmentRight to CounselDefendant AutonomyStructural ErrorSixth Amendmentassistance of counseldefendant autonomy

Facts

McCoy was charged with three first-degree murders and consistently maintained that he was out of state at the time of the killings and that corrupt police were responsible. His retained lawyer, English, concluded the evidence was overwhelming and decided to concede at the guilt phase that McCoy killed the victims in hopes of avoiding the death penalty. McCoy explicitly told English not to make that concession, sought to terminate English, and objected again in open court when English told the jury McCoy committed the murders. The jury convicted McCoy on all counts and returned death verdicts after counsel again conceded guilt at the penalty phase.

Issue

Whether the Sixth Amendment permits defense counsel to concede a defendant's guilt over the defendant's express, intransigent objection when counsel believes that concession offers the best chance to avoid the death penalty. Also, whether such a violation is subject to harmless-error or prejudice analysis.

Rule

The Sixth Amendment guarantees a criminal defendant the right to choose the objective of his defense, including insisting on maintaining innocence of the charged criminal acts. When a defendant expressly states that the objective of the defense is to maintain innocence and seek acquittal, counsel must abide by that objective and may not override it by conceding guilt; a violation of that autonomy right is structural error not subject to harmless-error review or Strickland prejudice analysis.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In a capital murder trial in Phoenix, Devon Pike repeatedly tells his lawyer, Mara Levin, that he wants to maintain he did not shoot anyone and wants a full acquittal. Levin believes the forensic evidence is overwhelming and, over Devon's objection, tells the jury in opening that Devon fired the gun but lacked the deliberation required for the capital charge.

Has Devon's Sixth Amendment right been violated?

Explanation. The majority held that some decisions belong to counsel, but the objective of the defense belongs to the defendant. When the defendant expressly insists on maintaining innocence of the charged criminal acts and seeking acquittal, counsel may not override that choice by admitting guilt, even if counsel believes concession is the best route to avoid a harsher penalty. The violation is of defendant autonomy, not merely poor strategy.