World Library  
Flag as Inappropriate
Email this Article

McKaskle v. Wiggins

Article Id: WHEBN0016644061
Reproduction Date:

Title: McKaskle v. Wiggins  
Author: World Heritage Encyclopedia
Language: English
Subject: Right to counsel, List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 465
Collection:
Publisher: World Heritage Encyclopedia
Publication
Date:
 

McKaskle v. Wiggins

McKaskle v. Wiggins
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued November 9, 1983
Decided January 24, 1984
Full case name McKaskle, Acting Director, Texas Department of Corrections v. Carl Edwin Wiggins
Citations 465 more)
104 S.Ct. 944; 79 L.Ed.2d 122
Prior history Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Holding
Respondent's Sixth Amendment right to conduct his own defense was not violated.
Court membership
Case opinions
Majority O'Connor, joined by Burger, Powell, Rehnquist, Blackmun, Stevens
Dissent Brennan, joined by Marshall, White
Laws applied
Sixth Amendment

McKaskle v. Wiggins, 465 U.S. 168 (1984), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the court considered the role of standby counsel in a criminal trial where the defendant conducted his own defense (pro se). In this case the defendant claimed his Sixth Amendment right to present his own case in a criminal trial was violated by the presence of a court-appointed standby counsel.[1]

Circumstances

Carl Edwin Wiggins was on trial for Robbery and chose to proceed pro se and was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment. The conviction was overturned on the technicality, that the indictment was defective and Wiggins requested counsel for the second trial.[2] The trial court appointed standby counsel to assist him if requested. Wiggins decided to defend himself and asked that the standby counsel be barred from interfering. Multiple times, both before and during the trial, Wiggins changed his mind regarding the standby counsels' role. Wiggins sometimes allowed or even requested standby counsels' participation. He was once again convicted. After his conviction, Wiggins moved for a new trial on the grounds that his standby counsel had interfered with his presentation of his own defense. This motion was denied by the trial court.[3]

Appeals

When Wiggins had exhausted both direct appellate and state habeas corpus, he filed a habeas petition in Federal District Court, claiming that standby counsel's conduct deprived him of his constitutional right to conduct his own defense as guaranteed in Faretta v. California (1975). The federal court agreed that counsel should not interfere without permission but found that Wiggins' attorneys had not interfered and the appeal was dismissed. Upon appeal the Court of Appeals reversed, holding that Wiggins' Sixth Amendment right to represent himself was violated by the intrusive participation of the court-appointed standby counsel.[3]

Decision

In a split 6–3 decision, the court found that Wiggins' right to present his own defense was not violated, since "it appears that he was allowed to make his own appearances as he saw fit and that his standby counsel's unsolicited involvement was held within reasonable limits."[4] Judge Sandra Day O'Connor delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Chief Justice Burger, Powell, Rehnquist, and Stevens joined. Blackmun concurred in the result. White filed a dissenting opinion in which Brennan and Marshall joined.

The decision was based on federal and state laws preserving a defendant's right to self-representation as guaranteed in Faretta (1975). Self-representation includes certain specific rights for a defendant to have his opinion heard. "The pro se defendant must be allowed to control the organization and content of his own defense, to make motions, to argue points of law, to participate in voir dire, to question witnesses, and to address the court and the jury at appropriate points in the trial. The record reveals that Wiggins was in fact accorded all of these rights."[4]

Significance

This case set a precedent for the boundaries on the behavior of standby counsel by refining the position taken in Faretta v. California regarding standby counsels' role.[5]

See also

References

Further reading

This article was sourced from Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. World Heritage Encyclopedia content is assembled from numerous content providers, Open Access Publishing, and in compliance with The Fair Access to Science and Technology Research Act (FASTR), Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., Public Library of Science, The Encyclopedia of Life, Open Book Publishers (OBP), PubMed, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health (NIH), U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, and USA.gov, which sources content from all federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial government publication portals (.gov, .mil, .edu). Funding for USA.gov and content contributors is made possible from the U.S. Congress, E-Government Act of 2002.
 
Crowd sourced content that is contributed to World Heritage Encyclopedia is peer reviewed and edited by our editorial staff to ensure quality scholarly research articles.
 
By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. World Heritage Encyclopedia™ is a registered trademark of the World Public Library Association, a non-profit organization.
 



Copyright © World Library Foundation. All rights reserved. eBooks from Hawaii eBook Library are sponsored by the World Library Foundation,
a 501c(4) Member's Support Non-Profit Organization, and is NOT affiliated with any governmental agency or department.