Lafler and Frye: Good News for Public Defense Litigation

Cara H. Drinan

Catholic University of America (CUA)

January 30, 2013

Federal Sentencing Reporter, Vol. 25, No. 2, 2012

In Missouri v. Frye and Lafler v. Cooper, the Supreme Court confirmed that the Sixth Amendment right to counsel applies to the plea negotiation process and held that prejudicial error can flow from ineffective plea advice. The defense community has applauded these decisions for recognizing the pivotal role that guilty pleas play in our criminal justice system and for requiring a minimum level of efficacy in plea lawyering. In this brief essay, I suggest that Frye and Lafler are victories for the defense community in yet another way. The decisions reflect judicial realism, and in this respect, they are especially important cases for systemic public defense litigation. Courts confronted with these suits in the past have stymied reform efforts by approaching these suits in a formalistic way, sending plaintiffs either to seek a post-conviction remedy or legislative redress, neither of which are practical options. Frye and Lafler, because they are grounded in the reality of today's criminal justice system, may provide critical leverage to lawyers asking courts for systemic relief.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 3

Open PDF in Browser Download This Paper

Date posted: January 31, 2013  

Suggested Citation

Drinan, Cara H., Lafler and Frye: Good News for Public Defense Litigation (January 30, 2013). Federal Sentencing Reporter, Vol. 25, No. 2, 2012. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2209483

Contact Information

Cara Hope Drinan (Contact Author)
Catholic University of America (CUA) ( email )
116 McMahon Hall
Washington, DC 20064
United States
Feedback to SSRN

Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 512
Downloads: 54
Download Rank: 301,518