Murray v. Giarratano (1988)

Docket
88-411
Decided
1988-01-01

Summary

Question: Are States required under the Sixth Amendment and the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to appoint counsel for indigent death row inmates seeking state post-conviction relief? Conclusion: No. Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist delivered the opinion for the 5-4 majority. The Court held that neither the Eighth Amendment nor the Due Process Clause requires states to appoint counsel for death row inmates looking for relief. States are not constitutionally obligated to provide relief post-conviction because the Constitution assures the right to counsel for an initial appeal from the judgment of the trial court. The Court also rejected the argument that capital cases require more legal assistance at collateral proceedings than non-capital cases. Justice Sandra Day O’Connor wrote a concurring opinion in which she argued that a post-conviction proceeding is not part of the criminal process but is a civil action that does not require the state to provide proceedings. Prisoners were still able to obtain counsel, despite Virginia not adopting procedures that are were as far-reaching as those of other states. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy joined in the concurrence. Justice John Paul Stevens wrote a dissent that claimed that Virginia’s procedure was unfair and did not provide indigent death row inmates an adequate opportunity to present their claims. Justice William J. Brennan, Jr., Justice Thurgood Marshall, and Justice Harry A. Blackmun joined in the dissent.

View the full interactive analysis on SCOTUS Lens →