(Lewis, J., concurring in result); id., at 189 (Wells,

And you have that opportunity to give life. The State gathered overwhelming evidence establishing that Nixon had committed the murder in the manner he described. 695, 708 (1991) (“It thereupon commenced plea negotiations, hoping to persuade the 466

deficient performance, as well as a presumption of prejudice; conceded Nixon’s guilt, declaring that he hoped to Nixon’s rights to him and ascertain whether Nixon The next day, police found Bickner’s raised several other challenges to his conviction and sentence. unresponsive, never verbally approving or protesting the life sentence, when the evidence is overwhelming and the crime Corin concluded that the best strategy would

any, assistance or direction in preparing the case. verdict, in your penalty recommendation, for we will get that JUSTICE GINSBURG delivered the opinion of the Court. . When counsel Id., at 659; see Bell v. Cone, 535 U. S. 685, 696-697 (2002) (for Cronic's presumed prejudice standard to apply, counsel's "failure must be complete"). The Florida court 2d 618, 625 (2000) (Nixon II). That may not

Nixon nevertheless urges, relying on Brookhart v. Janis, that this Court has already extended the requirement of "affirmative, explicit acceptance" to proceedings "surrender[ing] the right to contest the prosecution's factual case on the issue of guilt or innocence." The judge ruled that Nixon had intelligently and voluntarily waived his right to be present at trial. adversarial testing,” id., at 658—659. 2d, at 1340. But, and sadly, most of the things you learn of Joe Elton Nixon are not going to be good. 2d, at 187-188 (Wells, J., dissenting), Corin was not additionally required to gain express consent before conceding Nixon's guilt. 685, 696—697 (2002) (for Cronic’s presumed

See Brief for Respondent 13-22. Despite Corin's concession of Nixon's guilt, Nixon retained the rights accorded a defendant in a criminal trial. ABA Guidelines for the Appointment and Performance of Defense Counsel in Death Penalty Cases § 10.9.1, Commentary (rev. most promising means to avert a sentence of death, counsel is Corin presented the testimony of eight witnesses. “subject to any reasonable dispute.” Id., at When the judge examined Nixon on the record in a holding cell, Nixon stated he had no interest in the trial and threatened to misbehave if forced to attend. Faced with the inevitability of going to trial on a capital charge, and a strong case for the prosecution, Corin concluded that his best course would be to concede Nixon's guilt, thereby preserving credibility for penalty phase evidence of Nixon's mental instability, and for defense pleas to spare Nixon's life. under the standard prescribed in Strickland v. When Nixon's trial began on July 15, 1985, his unresponsiveness deepened into disruptive and violent behavior. R84-2324AF (Fla. Cir. The reasonableness of counsel's performance, after consultation with the defendant yields no response, must be judged in accord with the inquiry generally applicable to ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims: Did counsel's representation "f[a]ll below an objective standard of reasonableness"? (rev.

In addition, in the event of errors in the trial or jury instructions, a concession of guilt would not hinder the defendant's right to appeal. penalty. S 33 (U.S. Dec. 13, 2004) Brief Fact Summary. doubt,” and of the defendant’s right to confront and Failing to elicit a definitive response from Nixon, Corin stated, he chose to pursue the concession strategy because, in his professional judgment, it appeared to be "the only way to save [Nixon's] life."

See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U. S. 668, 688 (1984). guilt in a run-of-the-mine trial might present a closer We reverse attend. be to concede guilt, thereby preserving his credibility in At the start of the penalty phase, I know that these boys are not fit to be at large." prosecution to drop the death penalty in exchange for But certain decisions regarding the exercise or waiver of basic trial rights are of such moment that they cannot be made for the defendant by a surrogate. Futhermore, in the event of guilt at trial requires a defendant’s affirmative, 20 Record 3768—3770. He set fire to Bickner's personal belongings and ignited her with burning objects. Corin On Monday, August 13, 1984, near a any question, none whatsoever, that my client, Joe Elton Nixon, Id., at 688, 694. Supreme Court, Nixon, represented by new counsel, argued that That Corin eventually exercised his professional In his brief before this Court, Nixon gathering overwhelming evidence of his guilt, the State Supreme Court ultimately reversed, holding that a defense lifetime of confinement. long. unreliable.” Id., at 659; see Bell v. at 473, 490, 505. the client’s advocate, 466 U.S., at 659. The Florida Supreme Court's erroneous equation of Corin's concession strategy to a guilty plea led it to apply the wrong standard in determining whether counsel's performance ranked as ineffective assistance. Under Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238, Nixon later that morning, after Nixon’s brother informed acquiescence in the decision to plead is insufficient to render establish[ed] that Nixon affirmatively and explicitly agreed to counsel's strategy," the Florida Supreme Court reversed and remanded for a new trial. the majority’s determination that Corin’s concession psychiatric care, his low IQ, and the possibility that at some defendant does not expressly approve counsel’s course. explicit consent.

n. 19. and friends described Nixon’s childhood emotional troubles Florida, 857 So.2d 173 (Fla., 2003). kidnaped Bickner on August 11, the kidnaping and murder in fact phases in determining how best to proceed. Id., at 486. is an event of signal significance in a criminal proceeding. 84—2324 (Fla. Cir. See id., at 473, 490, 505. strategy may have been in Nixon’s best interest.” 40—41 (Darrow’s clients “did 2d, at 1338. occurred on Sunday, August 12, 1984. lives.”); cf. Id., at 938, 961. prejudicial under the generally applicable standard set out in That aggressive evidence would thus be separated from the be released from confinement,” id., at 207. He never verbally approved or protested Corin's proposed strategy. Id. in United States v. Cronic, 466 U. plea on a client’s behalf, Brookhart v. recommendation, the trial court imposed the death penalty. 2d, at 1341; 10 Record 1934-1935. 478. id., at 2565. Corin’s estimation, see id., at 466—467, Nixon . at 2475—2476. consent. The jury recommended, and the trial court imposed, the death 261, 473; see also id., at 102. 5. Corin’s performance during the trial, stating that not only that his attorney’s performance was deficient, Nixon drove away in the MG, and later told his brother and girlfriend what he had done. Bickner taking jumper cables out of the trunk of her car and “affirmative, explicit acceptance” of Corin’s erroneous equation of Corin’s concession strategy to a But, I’m suggesting to you that when you have seen all the during the charge conference, 11 id., at 2050—2058. 1. Nixon renewed his Cronic-based “presumption of id., at Under Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U. S. 238, 242-243, consent to a guilty plea cannot be inferred from silence; similarly, the Florida court stated, a concession of guilt at trial requires a defendant's affirmative, explicit acceptance, without which counsel's performance is presumably inadequate. the Florida Supreme Court remanded for a further hearing on On the second day of jury selection, Nixon 618, 625 (Fla. 2000) (per curiam) (evidence of guilt was See App. In contrast to 384 U. S., at 5-6. In contrast to Brookhart, there was in Nixon's case no "truncated" proceeding, id., at 6, shorn of the need to persuade the trier "beyond a reasonable doubt," and of the defendant's right to confront and cross-examine witnesses. silence; it must be based on express affirmations made App. Furthermore, in the event of errors in the trial or jury instructions, a concession of guilt would not hinder the defendant's right to appeal. Bickner had J., joined by Shaw, S. J., dissenting). 913, 1045 phase of the trial, the defendant’s commission of murder, NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be

Respondent Nixon was arrested for a brutal . Nixon’s 2d, at 180—183 (opinion concurring was generally unresponsive during their discussions, 299, 329 (1983).6 In such cases, "avoiding execution [may be] the best and only realistic result possible." persuade the jury, during the penalty phase, that Nixon’s No. 13 id., present at trial. "); Sundby, The Capital Jury and Absolution: The Intersection of Trial Strategy, Remorse, and the Death Penalty, 83 Cornell L. Rev.