argued
april
decided
june
respondent
hired
attorney
low
represent
federal
drug
charge
district
denied
low
application
admission
pro
hac
vice
ground
violated
professional
conduct
rule
one
exception
prevented
respondent
meeting
consulting
low
throughout
trial
jury
found
respondent
guilty
reversing
eighth
circuit
held
district
erred
interpreting
disciplinary
rule
refusal
admit
low
therefore
violated
respondent
sixth
amendment
right
paid
counsel
choosing
violation
subject
review
held
trial
erroneous
deprivation
criminal
defendant
choice
counsel
entitles
reversal
conviction
pp
light
government
concession
erroneous
deprivation
trial
error
violated
respondent
sixth
amendment
right
counsel
choice
rejects
government
contention
violation
complete
unless
defendant
show
substitute
counsel
ineffective
within
meaning
strickland
washington
performance
deficient
defendant
prejudiced
defendant
demonstrate
substitute
counsel
performance
deficient
good
counsel
choice
provided
creating
reasonable
probability
result
different
support
propositions
government
emphasizes
right
counsel
accorded
ensure
accused
receive
fair
trial
mickens
taylor
asserts
trial
unfair
unless
defendant
prejudiced
right
counsel
choice
however
commands
trial
fair
particular
guarantee
fairness
provided
wit
accused
defended
counsel
believes
best
cf
crawford
washington
right
violated
additional
showing
prejudice
required
make
violation
complete
pp
sixth
amendment
violation
subject
analysis
erroneous
deprivation
right
counsel
choice
consequences
necessarily
unquantifiable
indeterminate
unquestionably
qualifies
error
sullivan
louisiana
def
ies
analysis
error
standards
affec
ts
framework
within
trial
proceeds
simply
error
trial
process
arizona
fulminante
different
attorneys
pursue
different
strategies
regard
myriad
trial
matters
choice
attorney
affect
whether
terms
defendant
cooperates
prosecution
plea
bargains
decides
go
trial
impossible
know
different
choices
rejected
counsel
made
quantify
impact
different
choices
outcome
proceedings
inquiry
comparable
required
show
counsel
deficient
performance
prejudiced
defendant
pp
nothing
opinion
casts
doubt
places
qualification
upon
previous
holdings
limiting
right
counsel
choice
recognizing
trial
courts
authority
establish
criteria
admitting
lawyers
argue
however
broad
trial
discretion
may
accepts
government
concession
district
erred
pp
affirmed
remanded
scalia
delivered
opinion
stevens
souter
ginsburg
breyer
joined
alito
filed
dissenting
opinion
roberts
kennedy
thomas
joined
petitioner
cuauhtemoc
writ
certiorari
appeals
eighth
circuit
june
justice
scalia
delivered
opinion
must
decide
whether
trial
erroneous
deprivation
criminal
defendant
choice
counsel
entitles
reversal
conviction
respondent
cuauhtemoc
charged
eastern
district
missouri
conspiracy
distribute
kilograms
marijuana
family
hired
attorney
john
fahle
represent
arraignment
respondent
called
california
attorney
joseph
low
discuss
whether
low
represent
either
addition
instead
fahle
low
flew
california
meet
respondent
hired
time
later
low
fahle
represented
respondent
evidentiary
hearing
magistrate
judge
magistrate
judge
accepted
low
provisional
entry
appearance
permitted
low
participate
hearing
condition
immediately
file
motion
admission
pro
hac
vice
hearing
however
magistrate
judge
revoked
provisional
acceptance
ground
passing
notes
fahle
low
violated
rule
restricting
witness
one
counsel
following
week
respondent
informed
fahle
wanted
low
attorney
low
filed
application
admission
pro
hac
vice
district
denied
application
without
comment
month
later
low
filed
second
application
district
denied
without
explanation
low
appeal
form
application
writ
mandamus
dismissed
appeals
eighth
circuit
fahle
filed
motion
withdraw
counsel
hearing
consider
sanctions
low
fahle
asserted
contacting
respondent
respondent
represented
fahle
low
violated
mo
rule
professional
conduct
prohibits
lawyer
representing
client
communicat
ing
subject
representation
party
represented
another
lawyer
without
lawyer
consent
low
filed
motion
strike
fahle
motion
district
granted
fahle
motion
withdraw
granted
continuance
respondent
find
new
representation
respondent
retained
local
attorney
karl
dickhaus
trial
district
denied
low
motion
strike
first
time
explained
denied
low
motions
admission
pro
hac
vice
primarily
separate
case
low
violated
rule
communicating
represented
party
case
proceeded
trial
dickhaus
represented
respondent
low
moved
admission
denied
also
denied
dickhaus
request
low
counsel
table
ordered
low
sit
audience
contact
dickhaus
proceedings
enforce
order
marshal
sat
low
dickhaus
trial
respondent
unable
meet
low
throughout
trial
except
last
night
jury
found
respondent
guilty
trial
district
granted
fahle
motion
sanctions
low
read
rule
forbid
low
contact
respondent
without
fahle
permission
also
reiterated
denied
low
motions
admission
ground
low
violated
rule
separate
matter
respondent
appealed
eighth
circuit
vacated
conviction
first
held
district
erred
interpreting
rule
prohibit
low
conduct
case
separate
matter
district
based
denials
admission
motions
district
denials
motions
therefore
erroneous
violated
respondent
sixth
amendment
right
paid
counsel
choosing
see
concluded
sixth
amendment
violation
subject
review
see
granted
certiorari
ii
sixth
amendment
provides
criminal
prosecutions
accused
shall
enjoy
right
assistance
counsel
defence
previously
held
element
right
right
defendant
require
appointed
counsel
choose
represent
see
wheat
cf
powell
alabama
hardly
necessary
say
right
counsel
conceded
defendant
afforded
fair
opportunity
secure
counsel
choice
government
agrees
previously
sixth
amendment
guarantees
defendant
right
represented
otherwise
qualified
attorney
defendant
afford
hire
willing
represent
defendant
even
though
without
funds
caplin
drysdale
chartered
sure
right
counsel
choice
circumscribed
several
important
respects
wheat
supra
government
dispute
eighth
circuit
conclusion
case
district
erroneously
deprived
respondent
counsel
choice
government
contends
however
sixth
amendment
violation
complete
unless
defendant
show
substitute
counsel
ineffective
within
meaning
strickland
washington
substitute
counsel
performance
deficient
defendant
prejudiced
alternative
government
contends
defendant
must
least
demonstrate
counsel
choice
pursued
different
strategy
created
reasonable
probability
result
proceedings
different
words
prejudiced
within
meaning
strickland
denial
counsel
choice
even
substitute
counsel
performance
constitutionally
support
propositions
government
points
prior
cases
note
right
counsel
accorded
sake
effect
ability
accused
receive
fair
trial
mickens
taylor
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
trial
unfair
thus
sixth
amendment
violated
government
reasons
unless
defendant
prejudiced
stated
broadly
government
argument
effect
reads
sixth
amendment
detailed
version
due
process
clause
proceeds
give
effect
details
true
enough
purpose
rights
set
forth
amendment
ensure
fair
trial
follow
rights
disregarded
long
trial
whole
fair
government
urges
upon
us
urged
upon
us
successfully
one
time
see
ohio
roberts
regard
sixth
amendment
right
confrontation
line
reasoning
abstracts
right
purposes
eliminates
right
maryland
craig
scalia
dissenting
since
argued
purpose
confrontation
clause
ensure
reliability
evidence
long
testimonial
hearsay
bore
indicia
reliability
confrontation
clause
violated
see
roberts
supra
rejected
argument
prior
cases
accepted
crawford
washington
saying
confrontation
clause
commands
evidence
reliable
reliability
assessed
particular
manner
testing
crucible
also
sixth
amendment
right
counsel
choice
commands
trial
fair
particular
guarantee
fairness
provided
wit
accused
defended
counsel
believes
best
constitution
guarantees
fair
trial
due
process
clauses
defines
basic
elements
fair
trial
largely
several
provisions
sixth
amendment
including
counsel
clause
strickland
supra
sum
right
stake
right
counsel
choice
right
fair
trial
right
violated
deprivation
counsel
erroneous
additional
showing
prejudice
required
make
violation
complete
cases
government
relies
involve
right
effective
assistance
counsel
violation
generally
requires
defendant
establish
prejudice
see
strickland
supra
mickens
supra
cronic
earliest
case
generally
cited
proposition
right
counsel
right
effective
assistance
counsel
mcmann
richardson
based
due
process
clause
rather
sixth
amendment
see
powell
cited
mcmann
supra
even
recognition
right
effective
counsel
within
sixth
amendment
consequence
perception
representation
counsel
critical
ability
adversarial
system
produce
results
strickland
supra
derived
right
effective
representation
purpose
ensuring
fair
trial
logically
enough
also
derived
limits
right
purpose
see
mickens
supra
requirement
defendant
show
prejudice
effective
representation
cases
arises
nature
specific
element
right
counsel
issue
effective
representation
counsel
ineffective
unless
mistakes
harmed
defense
least
unless
reasonably
likely
thus
violation
sixth
amendment
right
effective
representation
complete
defendant
prejudiced
see
strickland
supra
right
select
counsel
one
choice
contrast
never
derived
sixth
amendment
purpose
ensuring
fair
regarded
root
meaning
constitutional
guarantee
see
wheat
see
generally
beaney
right
counsel
american
courts
cf
powell
supra
right
assisted
counsel
one
choice
wrongly
denied
therefore
unnecessary
conduct
ineffectiveness
prejudice
inquiry
establish
sixth
amendment
violation
deprivation
right
complete
defendant
erroneously
prevented
represented
lawyer
wants
regardless
quality
representation
received
argue
otherwise
confuse
right
counsel
choice
right
particular
lawyer
regardless
comparative
effectiveness
right
effective
counsel
imposes
baseline
requirement
competence
whatever
lawyer
chosen
appointed
iii
concluded
light
government
concession
erroneous
deprivation
trial
violated
respondent
sixth
amendment
right
counsel
choice
must
consider
whether
error
subject
review
harmlessness
arizona
fulminante
divided
constitutional
errors
two
classes
first
called
trial
error
errors
occurred
presentation
case
jury
effect
may
quantitatively
assessed
context
evidence
presented
order
determine
whether
harmless
beyond
reasonable
doubt
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
include
constitutional
errors
second
class
constitutional
error
called
structural
defects
defy
analysis
standards
affec
framework
within
trial
proceeds
simply
error
trial
process
see
also
neder
errors
include
denial
counsel
see
gideon
wainwright
denial
right
see
mckaskle
wiggins
denial
right
public
trial
see
waller
georgia
denial
right
trial
jury
giving
defective
instruction
see
sullivan
louisiana
little
trouble
concluding
erroneous
deprivation
right
counsel
choice
consequences
necessarily
unquantifiable
indeterminate
unquestionably
qualifies
error
different
attorneys
pursue
different
strategies
regard
investigation
discovery
development
theory
defense
selection
jury
presentation
witnesses
style
witness
examination
jury
argument
choice
attorney
affect
whether
terms
defendant
cooperates
prosecution
plea
bargains
decides
instead
go
trial
light
myriad
aspects
representation
erroneous
denial
counsel
bears
directly
framework
within
trial
proceeds
fulminante
supra
indeed
whether
proceeds
impossible
know
different
choices
rejected
counsel
made
quantify
impact
different
choices
outcome
proceedings
many
counseled
decisions
including
involving
plea
bargains
cooperation
government
even
concern
conduct
trial
analysis
context
speculative
inquiry
might
occurred
alternate
universe
government
acknowledges
deprivation
choice
counsel
pervades
entire
trial
points
counsel
ineffectiveness
may
also
yet
allow
reversal
conviction
reason
without
showing
prejudice
requirement
showing
prejudice
ineffectiveness
claims
stems
definition
right
issue
matter
showing
violation
harmless
showing
violation
right
effective
representation
occurred
violation
occurs
whenever
defendant
choice
wrongfully
denied
moreover
counsel
ineffectiveness
pervades
trial
extent
detect
identifiable
mistakes
assess
mistakes
affected
outcome
determine
effect
wrongful
denial
choice
counsel
however
looking
mistakes
committed
actual
counsel
differences
defense
made
rejected
counsel
matters
ranging
questions
asked
voir
dire
intangibles
argument
style
relationship
prosecutors
speculate
upon
matters
rejected
counsel
handled
differently
indeed
handled
benefit
courtroom
style
longstanding
relationship
trust
prosecutors
speculate
upon
effect
different
choices
different
intangibles
might
difficulties
conducting
two
assessments
prejudice
remotely
iv
nothing
said
today
casts
doubt
places
qualification
upon
previous
holdings
limit
right
counsel
choice
recognize
authority
trial
courts
establish
criteria
admitting
lawyers
argue
dissent
discusses
post
right
counsel
choice
extend
defendants
require
counsel
appointed
see
wheat
moreover
independent
interest
ensuring
criminal
trials
conducted
within
ethical
standards
profession
legal
proceedings
appear
fair
observe
wheat
supra
none
limitations
right
choose
one
counsel
relevant
case
power
enforce
rules
adhere
practices
determine
attorneys
may
appear
make
scheduling
decisions
effectively
exclude
defendant
first
choice
counsel
however
broad
discretion
may
government
conceded
district
erred
denied
respondent
choice
counsel
accepting
premise
hold
error
violated
respondent
sixth
amendment
right
counsel
choice
violation
subject
analysis
judgment
appeals
affirmed
case
remanded
proceedings
consistent
opinion
ordered
petitioner
cuauhtemoc
writ
certiorari
appeals
eighth
circuit
june
justice
alito
chief
justice
justice
kennedy
justice
thomas
join
dissenting
disagree
conclusion
criminal
conviction
must
automatically
reversed
whenever
trial
errs
applying
rules
regarding
pro
hac
vice
admissions
result
prevents
defendant
represented
trial
defendant
attorney
instead
defendant
required
make
least
showing
trial
erroneous
ruling
adversely
affected
quality
assistance
defendant
received
view
majority
contrary
holding
based
incorrect
interpretation
sixth
amendment
misapplication
principles
respectfully
dissent
majority
makes
subtle
important
mistake
outset
characterization
sixth
amendment
guarantees
majority
sixth
amendment
protects
right
defendant
require
appointed
counsel
choose
represent
ante
sixth
amendment
actually
protects
however
right
assistance
defendant
counsel
choice
able
provide
follows
erroneous
disqualification
defendant
counsel
choice
impair
assistance
defendant
receives
trial
violation
sixth
language
sixth
amendment
supports
interpretation
assistance
counsel
clause
focuses
defendant
entitled
receive
assistance
rather
identity
provider
background
adoption
sixth
amendment
points
direction
specific
evil
assistance
counsel
clause
aimed
english
rule
severely
limiting
felony
defendant
ability
assisted
counsel
ash
core
purpose
counsel
guarantee
assure
trial
thereby
assure
fairness
adversary
criminal
process
morrison
essential
aim
amendment
ensure
defendant
inexorably
represented
lawyer
prefers
wheat
cf
morris
slappy
reject
claim
sixth
amendment
guarantees
relationship
accused
counsel
doubt
course
right
assistance
counsel
carries
limited
right
represented
counsel
choice
time
adoption
bill
rights
availability
appointed
counsel
generally
right
inevitably
played
defendant
right
assistance
counsel
necessarily
meant
right
assistance
whatever
counsel
defendant
able
secure
beginning
right
counsel
choice
circumscribed
one
thing
defendant
choice
counsel
always
restricted
rules
governing
admission
practice
question
judiciary
act
made
clear
providing
parties
courts
right
assistance
counsel
attorneys
law
rules
said
courts
respectively
shall
permitted
manage
conduct
cases
therein
ch
stat
therefore
defendant
attorney
eligible
appear
rules
particular
defendant
right
represented
attorney
indeed
defendant
top
top
choices
attorneys
eligible
appear
question
defendant
right
represented
today
rules
governing
admission
practice
particular
courts
continue
limit
ability
criminal
defendant
represented
counsel
choice
see
wheat
right
counsel
choice
also
limited
rules
even
defendant
aware
attorney
choice
conflict
even
defendant
eager
waive
objection
defendant
constitutional
right
represented
attorney
see
similarly
right
represented
counsel
choice
limited
mundane
considerations
trial
judge
schedules
trial
begin
particular
date
defendant
counsel
choice
already
committed
trials
time
thereafter
trial
judge
discretion
appropriate
circumstances
refuse
postpone
trial
date
thereby
effect
force
defendant
forgo
counsel
choice
see
slappy
supra
hughey
limitations
right
counsel
choice
tolerable
focus
right
quality
representation
defendant
receives
identity
attorney
provides
representation
limiting
defendant
attorneys
willing
available
eligible
represent
defendant
still
leaves
defendant
pool
attorneys
choose
jurisdictions
today
large
diverse
pool
thus
restrictions
generally
adverse
effect
defendant
ability
secure
best
assistance
defendant
circumstances
permit
sixth
amendment
focuses
quality
assistance
counsel
choice
provided
hold
erroneous
disqualification
counsel
violate
sixth
amendment
unless
ruling
diminishes
quality
assistance
defendant
otherwise
received
require
defendant
show
attorney
constitutionally
ineffective
within
meaning
strickland
washington
rather
defendant
entitled
new
trial
defendant
show
identifiable
difference
quality
representation
disqualified
counsel
attorney
represents
defendant
trial
rodriguez
chandler
cert
denied
approach
fully
consistent
prior
decisions
never
held
erroneous
disqualification
counsel
violates
sixth
amendment
prejudice
stated
several
cases
sixth
amendment
protects
defendant
right
counsel
choice
see
caplin
drysdale
chartered
wheat
supra
powell
alabama
occasion
cases
consider
whether
violation
right
shown
prejudice
opinions
cases
refer
question
therefore
unreasonable
read
general
statements
regarding
counsel
choice
addressing
issue
ii
even
accepting
majority
holds
erroneous
disqualification
counsel
choice
always
violates
sixth
amendment
still
follow
reversal
required
cases
constitution
terms
mandate
particular
remedy
violations
provisions
instead
bound
case
federal
rule
criminal
procedure
instructs
federal
courts
disregar
ny
error
affect
substantial
rights
see
also
chapman
california
exceptions
recognized
rule
limited
class
fundamental
constitutional
errors
analysis
harmless
error
standards
neder
quoting
arizona
fulminante
see
also
chapman
supra
errors
render
trial
fundamentally
unfair
deprive
defendants
protections
without
criminal
trial
reliably
serve
function
vehicle
determination
guilt
innocence
criminal
punishment
may
regarded
fundamentally
fair
neder
supra
quoting
rose
clark
second
omission
original
see
also
ante
listing
errors
thus
neder
rejected
argument
omission
element
crime
jury
instruction
necessarily
render
criminal
trial
fundamentally
unfair
unreliable
vehicle
determining
guilt
innocence
fact
case
quite
opposite
true
neder
tried
impartial
judge
correct
standard
proof
assistance
counsel
fairly
selected
impartial
jury
instructed
consider
evidence
argument
respect
neder
defense
ibid
neder
situation
impartial
judge
correct
standard
proof
assistance
counsel
fair
jury
much
like
respondent
fundamental
unfairness
inexorably
follow
denial
counsel
decision
retain
particular
lawyer
often
uninformed
cuyler
sullivan
defendant
lawyer
may
thus
turn
better
defendant
lawyer
often
defendant
lawyers
may
simply
indistinguishable
possibilities
justify
violating
right
choice
counsel
make
hard
put
characterize
violation
always
render
ing
trial
unfair
neder
supra
fairness
may
limit
right
see
ante
inform
remedy
always
nearly
always
impossible
determine
whether
first
choice
provided
better
representation
second
choice
undoubtedly
cases
prosecution
little
difficulty
showing
attorney
better
qualified
least
qualified
defendant
initial
choice
cases
evident
trial
judge
difference
ability
strategy
possibly
affected
outcome
trial
requiring
defendant
fall
back
attorney
comparable
denying
defendant
right
represented
counsel
refusing
permit
defendant
receive
assistance
counsel
epitome
fundamental
unfairness
far
effect
outcome
concerned
much
difficult
assess
effect
complete
denial
counsel
assess
effect
merely
preventing
representation
defendant
attorney
sure
effect
erroneous
disqualification
hard
gauge
prosecution
unable
meet
burden
showing
error
harmless
beyond
reasonable
doubt
justify
eliminating
possibility
showing
harmless
error
cases
majority
focus
trial
error
structural
defect
dichotomy
misleading
fulminante
used
terms
denote
two
poles
constitutional
error
appeared
prior
cases
trial
errors
always
lead
review
structural
defects
always
lead
automatic
reversal
see
suggest
trial
errors
sorts
errors
amenable
review
errors
affecting
framework
within
trial
proceeds
structural
touchstone
structural
error
fundamental
unfairness
unreliability
automatic
reversal
strong
medicine
reserved
constitutional
errors
always
necessarily
neder
supra
emphasis
original
produce
unfairness
iii
either
two
courses
outlined
requiring
least
showing
prejudice
engaging
review
avoid
anomalous
unjustifiable
consequences
follow
majority
rule
error
without
prejudice
followed
automatic
reversal
majority
holding
defendant
erroneously
required
go
trial
attorney
automatically
entitled
new
trial
even
attorney
performed
brilliantly
contrast
defendant
whose
attorney
ineffective
constitutional
sense
made
errors
serious
counsel
functioning
guaranteed
sixth
amendment
strickland
obtain
relief
without
showing
prejudice
majority
holding
trial
may
adopt
rules
severely
restricting
pro
hac
vice
admissions
cf
leis
flynt
per
curiam
adopts
generous
rule
errs
interpreting
applying
error
automatically
requires
reversal
conviction
regardless
whether
erroneous
ruling
effect
defendant
majority
holding
defendants
awarded
new
trials
even
though
clear
erroneous
disqualification
counsel
prejudice
least
suppose
example
defendant
initially
represented
attorney
previously
represented
defendant
civil
matters
little
criminal
experience
suppose
attorney
erroneously
disqualified
defendant
able
secure
services
nationally
acclaimed
highly
experienced
criminal
defense
attorney
secures
surprisingly
favorable
result
trial
instance
acquittal
counts
majority
holding
trial
erroneous
ruling
automatically
means
sixth
amendment
violated
even
defendant
makes
attempt
argue
disqualified
attorney
done
better
job
fact
defendant
still
entitled
new
trial
counts
conviction
even
defendant
publicly
proclaimed
verdict
second
attorney
provided
better
representation
attorney
country
possibly
done
cases
stark
hypothetical
unlikely
certainly
cases
erroneous
disqualification
defendant
counsel
neither
seriously
upsets
defendant
preferences
impairs
defendant
representation
trial
noted
defendant
lawyer
may
sometimes
better
defendant
lawyer
defendants
retain
counsel
frequently
forced
choose
among
attorneys
know
limited
information
thus
defendant
may
strong
preference
one
candidates
addition
attorneys
considered
charge
roughly
comparable
fees
may
also
roughly
comparable
experience
ability
circumstances
erroneous
disqualification
defendant
attorney
may
simply
mean
defendant
represented
attorney
defendant
nearly
chose
initially
able
provide
representation
good
furnished
disqualified
attorney
light
realities
mandating
reversal
without
even
minimal
showing
prejudice
part
defendant
unwarranted
consequences
majority
holding
particularly
severe
federal
system
systems
allow
defendant
take
interlocutory
appeal
counsel
disqualified
see
flanagan
systems
appellate
review
typically
occurs
defendant
tried
convicted
point
appellate
concludes
trial
judge
made
marginally
incorrect
ruling
applying
pro
hac
vice
rules
appellate
alternative
order
new
trial
even
even
claim
prejudice
sixth
amendment
require
results
believe
showing
prejudice
required
establish
violation
sixth
amendment
vacate
remand
let
appeals
determine
whether
prejudice
however
assuming
sake
argument
prejudice
required
believe
violation
like
constitutional
violations
amenable
review
statutes
demand
precedents
bar
vacate
remand
let
appeals
determine
whether
error
harmless
case
footnotes
dissent
proposes
yet
third
standard
defendant
must
show
identifiable
difference
quality
representation
disqualified
counsel
attorney
represents
defendant
trial
post
opinion
alito
proposal
suffers
infirmities
outlined
later
text
beset
government
positions
addition
however
greatly
impairs
clarity
law
judge
know
identifiable
difference
consists
whereas
government
least
appeals
strickland
case
law
dissent
claim
way
precedential
support
rule
consistent
cases
never
discussed
issue
prejudice
id
dissent
resists
giving
effect
cases
recognition
government
concession
defendant
right
defended
counsel
choosing
argues
sixth
amendment
guarantees
right
assistance
counsel
violated
unless
erroneous
disqualification
defendant
counsel
choice
impair
assistance
defendant
receives
trial
post
opinion
alito
cases
government
concession
mean
anything
sixth
amendment
violated
erroneous
disqualification
counsel
impair
assistance
defendant
receives
trial
counsel
chose
wheat
formulated
right
counsel
choice
discussed
limitations
upon
took
note
overarching
purpose
fair
trial
holding
trial
discretion
disallow
first
choice
counsel
create
serious
risk
conflict
interest
one
thing
conclude
right
counsel
choice
may
limited
need
fair
trial
quite
another
say
right
exist
unless
denial
renders
trial
unfair
dissent
criticizes
us
trial
defect
dichotomy
asserting
fulminante
never
said
trial
errors
sorts
errors
amenable
review
errors
affecting
framework
within
trial
proceeds
structural
post
opinion
alito
internal
quotation
marks
citation
omitted
although
hard
read
case
anything
dividing
constitutional
error
two
comprehensive
categories
ensuing
analysis
fact
relies
neither
upon
comprehensiveness
upon
trial
error
touchstone
availability
review
rather
done
past
rest
conclusion
structural
error
upon
difficulty
assessing
effect
error
see
waller
georgia
violation
guarantee
subject
harmlessness
review
benefits
public
trial
frequently
intangible
difficult
prove
matter
chance
vasquez
hillery
hen
petit
jury
selected
upon
improper
criteria
exposed
prejudicial
publicity
required
reversal
conviction
effect
violation
ascertained
dissent
use
fundamental
unfairness
sole
criterion
structural
error
cites
case
determining
factor
see
neder
quoted
dissent
post
criterion
used
addition
cases
using
difficulty
assessment
test
also
relied
irrelevance
harmlessness
see
mckaskle
wiggins
since
right
right
exercised
usually
increases
likelihood
trial
outcome
unfavorable
defendant
denial
amenable
error
analysis
thus
dissent
creates
single
inflexible
criterion
inconsistent
reasoning
precedents
asserts
errors
always
necessarily
render
trial
fundamentally
unfair
unreliable
structural
post
discussion
analysis
required
conduct
review
dissent
focuses
counsel
better
see
post
opinion
alito
focus
effect
making
analysis
look
achievable
fundamentally
inconsistent
principle
dissent
purports
accept
sake
argument
sixth
amendment
violated
without
showing
harm
quality
representation
cf
mckaskle
supra
framing
inquiry
terms
expressing
indignation
thought
defendant
may
receive
new
trial
actual
counsel
least
effective
one
wanted
dissent
betrays
misunderstanding
nature
right
counsel
choice
confusion
right
right
effective
assistance
counsel
footnotes
view
consistent
government
concession
sixth
amendment
encompasses
defendant
right
select
counsel
represent
criminal
prosecution
brief
though
right
circumscribed
several
important
respects
citation
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
see
act
apr
ch
stat
providing
appointment
counsel
capital
cases
betts
brady
surveying
state
statutes
powell
case
generally
cited
first
noting
defendant
right
counsel
choice
powell
involved
infamous
trial
defendants
prevented
obtaining
counsel
choice
instead
constrained
proceed
counsel
dubious
effectiveness
held
denied
due
process
fair
opportunity
secure
counsel
one
choice
necessary
concomitant
right
counsel
cf
failure
trial
give
petitioners
reasonable
time
opportunity
secure
counsel
clear
denial
due
process
clear
facts
case
referring
denial
opportunity
choose
counsel
certainly
said
nothing
suggest
violation
right
counsel
choice
established
without
showing
prejudice
wheat
held
trial
judge
erred
declining
defendant
waiver
right
counsel
therefore
need
consider
whether
incorrect
ruling
required
reversal
defendant
conviction
absence
showing
prejudice
noted
right
select
represented
one
preferred
attorney
comprehended
sixth
amendment
went
stress
right
circumscribed
several
important
respects
including
requirement
bar
membership
rules
conflicts
interest
wheat
suggest
violation
limited
sixth
amendment
right
counsel
choice
established
without
showing
prejudice
statements
sixth
amendment
purpose
essential
aim
providing
effective
advocacy
fair
trial
suggest
opposite
finally
caplin
drysdale
held
challenged
action
trial
judge
entering
order
forfeiting
funds
defendant
earmarked
use
paying
attorneys
proper
accordingly
occasion
address
issue
prejudice
recognized
sixth
amendment
guarantees
defendant
right
represented
otherwise
qualified
attorney
defendant
afford
hire
willing
represent
defendant
even
though
without
funds
added
hatever
full
extent
sixth
amendment
protection
one
right
retain
counsel
choosing
protection
go
beyond
individual
right
spend
money
obtain
advice
assistance
counsel
omission
original