Court: Defendants Can Choose Attorneys They Hire

If defendants in criminal cases can hire their own attorneys they can automatically get a new trial if their first choice of an attorney is not allowed by a judge, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 vote.

The case involved Cuauhtemoc Gonzalez-Lopez, a Missouri man who was accused of conspiring to distribute more than 100 kilograms of marijuana. His family hired a Missouri attorney to defend him, but Gonzalez-Lopez wanted an attorney from California.

The California attorney flew to Missouri to represent him, but got into conflict with the attorney of record. The judge ruled that the California attorney, Joseph Low, had spoken to the defendant against the wishes of his attorney of record, John Fahle, and would not allow Low to represent Gonzalez-Lopez.

When Gonzalez-Lopez was found guilty, he appealed on the grounds that his Sixth Amendment's guarantee to counsel was denied.

Defendants Free to Choose

Justice Antonin Scalia, who voted with the more liberal Justices on the issue, wrote for the majority, "It commands, not that a trial be fair, but that a particular guarantee of fairness be provided - to wit, that the accused be defended by the counsel he believes to be the best."

Writing his first dissent opinion, Justice Samuel Alito wrote that "the focus of the [Sixth Amendment] right is the quality of the representation ... not the identity of the attorney who provides the representation."

See Also:
Justices: Defendants Can Hire Own Lawyers

More Information:
Crime Issues and Controversies