c

 c 
 cc
c
c

c 
c
c  c
c! c
 c 
 cc" #c$c c   % c
Powell v Alabama limited decision on DUE PROCESS that it was a constitiutional right to have counsel: on a capital charge
and defendant is ignorant, feeble minded, illiterate or alike: limited to facts making it difficult to satisfy conditions. Johnson v
Zerbst(1938): 6th Amend. Requires provision of counsel to indigent defendant in all felony cases. Betts v. Brady rejected this
decision that due process requires such an appointment in all felony cases, but ONLY where the trial LACKS fundamental
fairness.
 &cc
 & 
c!c'
' &(overruled betts v. Brady only where the case involved
fundamental fairness)*cccDefendant requires counsel to be assured a fair trial, applies to all felonies and
misdemeanours with jail time: links with right to liberty.
'
c  c
 c
c.c5$! c$c
 c? What court are we in? '
c  c c ;c c$ c
/
? Should they have Counsel Appointed? c1c! c
 < Have the D¶s 6th Am. Been afforded?
 &cc c
: not perfect but good at job (competent)
Jones v. Barnes: strategies are permited by counsel, e.g dress code BUT pleas (serious requests) are personal and
must be abided by. Whether cousel did what the D asked or FAILED to consult/ INVESTIGATE
Competency test:  +
c!c'
&
c,c-$c

c(
$.  c/
 $c
c! #
c0c$ 
c
c
" #1c2
c

c."
c2 c ! )c
3c
-
cIn all the circumstances identified Counsels acts/omissions were outside the range of
professional competence (what counsel did/did not do showed incompetence to an objective standard).Was
the mistake in the µrange of competency¶ 2"$  c!c4c# 5 c

$ 
,c -4 cDid counsels actions affect the outcome of the case.
Vc Nix v whiteside, Smith v. Murray, Kimmelman v Morrison
" #ccc/ c#

" c
c.= c   c>c/
c/c" #0c   c
$
<c Identify
specific issues ± acts/ omissions by Counsel 55#c
 c,c5$c>c/
c
cc"c" <
What is the likely outcome? Comparisons to cases? 
c 
$"
c$.c
 c   



c !  cc
' &&
cc ccounsels failure to investigate was held incompetent and violated the 6th Amend right to
counselcccccccccccccccccccc +cc'cextends the standard of Strickland when considering a
reversal of a conviction, it must demonstrate that counsel¶s errors were so serious it deprived the defendant
of a fair/ reliable trial
c
cc 
c# .
c
c .  2# c !  c
67c!1c$# cu



  
  


 



 

   

  

 
8"#5
$c !  c2 c$ 9" 
c2c
 c   1c
0cc
  
c2# 
cc
 c5$ "
 ‘
 

‘
 ‘   
 u‘
   
   
 ! $c  c
c
c
 c$ 9" $ . 
cc67
c
cc6&7: MATERIAL EVIDENCE: reasonable possibility that had the evidence been disclosed to the
defence the outcome of the proceeding would be different ($ 2# c5$22 #
c" $.  c
 c  cc
"
. ). Absence of evidence did he receive a fair trial? (c"
.
c$ ! $# for non disclosure it has to be
material to the outcome)
c c$c
 c   c
c$ 9" 
c
 c !  c
c
+7cc' 7 EXCULPATORY EVIDENCE: (weakened prosecution case) -$ "
$ccc
 $.
! c "
c
c # c!"$2# c !  c
c
 c   1c ! c c
c  c
c5$! c   c2"
c :
#"$ c$ "#
c cc" $c
$ #cProsecution has a duty to all police and agencies info. Is disclosed even if
they have not disclosed it to the prosecutor.
Giglio v. US: !"$2# c !  extends to evidence that may impeach credibility of government
Miller v. Pate: prosecution knew stain in boxer were not blood but paint, violated 14th amend.
@  prosecution has duty to disclose evidence. Prohibition of bad faith destruction of evidence:
letter that police knew about did not show innocence but jury has the right to hear it. ("25 c$ 
)c
+cc c2 #
c$c
 c"$c
c $c.

c !  cac
US v. Agurs: 5$ "
ccc "
c

c"
 c c  .
 &c?-c3@
c .   . 
c


 /c!c# $  c

: determined whether a indigent defendant could have an expert witness for mental illness
defence. (defendant interest, states interest and risk of error)
+c
The Defence has a right to retain an opposing expert (psychiatrist) at the expense of the state where he is using it for
a defence/ a significant factor at trial. But this is at a basic level. Not a lavish luxury.
 c!c

1 making clear that the indigent's right to access to expert assistance is not limited to psychiatrists.
#/ ##c!c   55 c$ 
c
c$ # 2# c
c  c" $c
 cAc

1c 85 $
c/
 c

.c
/
"
c 
 c" 
c
c.= cc
c c
 c c.$ c$c# c
$" 1c/ c c  $"c c
 
 c5$ c
c

cc 6 7cc 
c
c "$ cc $c 
 c
"# c,Acc $#c$"# cc$ . #c5$ "$ c5$! c
 c$ 
c
c 85 $
c/
 c

c-c
7  provides fundamental fairness

Bc

c(" c5$ c#" c
c $#c# ! #)c$ 
c
cc-cno person shall be deprived of life,
liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without justccompensation
3@c

c c
 c 9" !# 
c
c
 cB
c.  c6"
c$ 
c c cccc

c$ . #c
-$ "
c
 c! c
 c$ 
c
cc-7c c-6 c
$ #c c &cc 
 cc
 c
Arraignment: defendant knows what they are charged with and can plead guilty/not guilty to build a defensecA
c


cSentencing restricts excessive fines and cruel and unusual punishmentc= $c!c& $  punishment
overturned (death penalty for rape) c


7cc"# c()c
3  
³ an individual who has the intent to commit a felony has the sufficient required for
murder´this means intent is transferred and the defendant can be charged with murder, if it was an accident. c3
c
$ c 
c5 #
;c, c $ c$ =# c= ## c

, $"´ Felony: (it must be dangerous not fraudulent tax form in car who run someone over accidently)
Felony ³inherently dangerous to life or health´= reasons why it¶s dangerous/not? (common law/ evil in itself)
4&c
$.  cC  $ 
#c  $"0 1. Is it a general dangerous crime? 2. Subjective test: relating to the
fact to determine danger.

V³|  
  ´ between the felony and killing
È It is 
c "cto say the death merely occurs at the same time the felony is being committed.
È The felony c& c ccto the killing.(robbing a shop with a gun and accomplice)
È $ c
c
 cD6c%crelationship between the felony and killing must exist: establishes through
dangerous situation:

"$#c c-$22# c 9"  ´: The death must be a natural and probable cause
of the D¶s conduct. (

c" 85 
c$c2 E$$ c 
1c
$"=c2c# 
 )
Robber kill bystander/victim FMR applies
- 5# c!c' 
cc(5#  ;! 
.)c
c $ c
c$.c
 c$22 $0c"c= ##c2
 $1cc  c
c
55#1c#c c
 c$22 $c
c $



c!c' ## . Felon kills felon(accomplice) the FMR does not apply: #c55# 2# c
c  
c5 $c
= ## c
../ #
c!c #  c! 
.;5#  c= ##c$22 $cc  c 
c55#c#c
c  
*c
c #c
 ! #5c' ## .c"$
 $cc' $ c: #c= ##c . #c 
cc c
c"$  2# ; 8
$$ $cc.c
55#c2"
c

c!c' ## .c c55# 2# c c.
c

cc
c
c
@c@
  ´ of a Co-felon: .5#  c
 $ c55# 2# c
c##c: #c c= ## c/cD


  


 %c cc
 cD  

 %c$ "#
cc
 c #
1. intentional killing/ accidental if it furthers the felon e.g kills security to escape, codefedant it liable even if has no
desire/ intention. 2. Not in the furtherance of felony: e.g no need to kill person, revengeful. FMR not applied.

BD‘

 
of a Felony
The FMR only applies to killings ³in the commission of a felony´; when felony began and end then when was the
killing.
Escape as part of felony: (killing is ³ 
 to felony) ,Immediate Flight ± FMR applies if felons
in ³´ from scene of felony. Possession of ³booty´ ± Idea that the felony does not end until ³booty´
is in a safe place. V dies whilst trying to escape danger ± FMR applicable .Intent follows killing ± FMR unlikely to
apply if D forms the intent to commit felony after the killing. E.g. A and B fight. Seeing A lying helpless (but in fact
dead) B robs him. Suggestible that this is ³not in the commission´.
c
"
"$ cc People v. Aaron: Michigan abolished FMR political doctrine(senate votes) model penal code
rejects it the Depraved heart rule is more logical. It¶s apposed. But it has been restricted.

Conclusion: answer 5 tests.