Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Frederick R. Whatley v. Warden, Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Prison
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, No. 13-12034 · judgment June 20, 2019
Before the decision, modestly above the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for a circuit split argued in the petition, a dissent in the court below (flagged in the petition), and an Eleventh Circuit decision below, and down for a state or local-government respondent.
Question presented
A defendant asserting a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel must show that counsel’s “deficient performance prejudiced the defense.” Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984). This Court has also held that it is “inherently prejudicial” for a defendant to appear before a jury in shackles. Holbrook v. Flynn, 475 U.S. 560, 568 (1986). The circuits are split on the interaction of these bodies of law where a person in state custody brings a habeas petition asserting ineffective assistance because defense counsel failed to object to visible shackling at trial. The Seventh Circuit holds that a state court unreasonably applies federal law, under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d), if the court fails to account for the inherently prejudicial effect of shackling. By contrast, the Ninth and Eleventh Circuits hold that a state court need not account for this Court’s shackling cases when assessing Strickland prejudice. That holding led the Eleventh Circuit here to deny a habeas petition by a death row inmate who was forced, at sentencing, to reenact his crime while visibly shackled before the jury, with the prosecutor playing the victim. The question presented is: Does a state court unreasonably apply federal law when, in determining whether a person suffered prejudice as a result of ineffective assistance of counsel, it disregards this Court’s case law recognizing that shackling is inherently prejudicial?
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Thomas Mark Bondy
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP
For respondent
Sabrina D. Graham
Senior Assistant Attorney General
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 12 conferences
Amicus briefs
1 cert-stage
Argument & decision
Decided April 19, 2021.
Proceedings
- Apr 19 2021Petition DENIED. Justice Sotomayor, dissenting from denial of certiorari. (Detached Opinion)
- Apr 12 2021DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/16/2021.
- Mar 29 2021DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/1/2021.
- Mar 23 2021Rescheduled.
- Mar 22 2021DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/26/2021.
- Mar 15 2021DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/19/2021.
- Mar 15 2021Rescheduled.
- Mar 01 2021DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/5/2021.
- Mar 01 2021Rescheduled.
- Feb 22 2021DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/26/2021.
- Feb 22 2021Rescheduled.
- Feb 16 2021Rescheduled.
- Feb 12 2021DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/19/2021.
- Jan 19 2021DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/22/2021.
- Jan 19 2021Rescheduled.
- Jan 11 2021DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/15/2021.
- Jan 11 2021Rescheduled.
- Jan 04 2021DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/8/2021.
- Jan 04 2021Rescheduled.
- Dec 07 2020DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/11/2020.
- Dec 07 2020Rescheduled.
- Dec 01 2020Rescheduled.
- Nov 10 2020DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/4/2020.
- Nov 09 2020Reply of petitioner Frederick R. Whatley filed. (Distributed)
- Oct 29 2020Motion to delay distribution of the petition for a writ certiorari until November 10, 2020 granted.
- Oct 28 2020Motion of petitioner to delay distribution of the petition for a writ of certiorari under Rule 15.5 from November 4, 2020 to November 10, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.
- Oct 19 2020Brief amicus curiae of The National Association for Public Defense filed.
- Oct 15 2020Brief of respondents Warden, Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Center in opposition filed.
- Sep 08 2020Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 19, 2020)