SCOTUS Takes Another Case on Right to Counsel in Collateral Proceedings
For the second time this month, the Court has granted certiorari in a case dealing with the right to counsel in collateral proceedings. The first case, Martinez v. Ryan (see my post here), concerns a potential constitutional right to counsel in a collateral proceeding in state court. The new case, Martel v. Clair (No. 10-1265), deals with a potential statutory right to counsel in a federal habeas case.
Here’s what happened. Convicted of murder and sentenced to death in state court, Clair filed a federal habeas petition. After discovery and an evidentiary hearing, Clair complained to the district court regarding the quality of his appointed federal public defender. It seems that Clair and his lawyer then patched up their relationship, but a couple months later Clair again wrote to the district court and asked for the appointment of substitute counsel to pursue new leads supporting an innocence claim. The district court denied the request in a brief order and, on the same day, denied all of the claims in the underlying petition. On appeal, the Ninth Circuit then vacated the judgment below on the ground that the district court had abused its discretion by failing to conduct further inquiry into Clair’s complaints about his public defender. The Supreme Court granted the state’s petition for certiorari yesterday.
At one level, the Ninth Circuit’s decision seems a very modest one that hardly warrants Supreme Court review.