Nix v. Whiteside
89 L. Ed. 2d 123 · Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
Facts
Whiteside was convicted of second-degree murder after stabbing Calvin Love during an argument over marihuana in Love's apartment. Whiteside claimed self-defense, stating Love reached under a pillow and moved toward him. Initially, Whiteside told his attorney, Gary Robinson, he believed Love had a gun but hadn't seen one. A week before trial, Whiteside told Robinson he would testify he saw "something metallic" in Love's hand, stating, "If I don't say I saw a gun, I'm dead." Robinson informed Whiteside that such testimony would be perjury and that he would disclose it to the court and seek to withdraw if Whiteside insisted. Whiteside ultimately testified he "knew" Love had a gun but admitted on cross-examination he had not actually seen one.
Procedural history
Whiteside was convicted of second-degree murder by a jury, and the Iowa courts affirmed his conviction. He then sought a writ of habeas corpus in federal district court, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel, but the district court denied the writ. The United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit reversed, directing that the writ be granted, reasoning that counsel's actions constituted a threat violating the attorney's duty to preserve client confidences. The Supreme Court granted certiorari and reversed the Court of Appeals' decision.
Issue
The legal question is whether the Sixth Amendment right of a criminal defendant to assistance of counsel is violated when an attorney refuses to cooperate with the defendant in presenting perjured testimony at his trial.
Holding
The Court held that the Sixth Amendment right to assistance of counsel is not violated when an attorney refuses to cooperate with a defendant in presenting perjured testimony. The Court reversed the Court of Appeals' decision.
Rule
The Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel, under Strickland v. Washington, requires both serious attorney error and prejudice. However, an attorney's duty of loyalty to a client is limited to legitimate, lawful conduct and does not extend to assisting in presenting false evidence or violating the law. There is no constitutional right for a defendant to commit perjury or to have counsel assist in presenting false testimony. An attorney's ethical duty to prevent and disclose frauds upon the court, including perjury, is paramount. Therefore, an attorney's actions to dissuade a client from perjury, or to threaten withdrawal and disclosure, fall within the wide range of reasonable professional conduct and do not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel. Such actions do not cause prejudice under Strickland because a defendant has no entitlement to a different outcome based on perjured testimony.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener
Case brief last reviewed . Prepared by CaseReader from the published opinion.