State Had Good Reason To File Supreme Court Briefs

Chief State's Attorney calls criticism of participation in plea bargain case misguided

, The Connecticut Law Tribune

The Connecticut Law Tribune's Editorial Board on May 14, 2012, in an editorial that is surprisingly disingenuous, criticized the Office of the Chief State's Attorney for filing an amicus brief in the U.S.Supreme Court in the cases of Missouri v. Frye and Lafler v. Cooper. In the amicus brief, which was joined by 28 other states, the office argued, as did the U.S. Department of Justice and the National District Attorneys Association, that a defendant who is convicted after either a fair trial or a knowing and voluntary guilty plea is not entitled under the U.S. Constitution to have his conviction vacated on the ground that his attorney either failed to inform him of, or advise him to accept, a plea offer that was more favorable than the sentence ultimately imposed.

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Continue to Lexis Advance®

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at