[textbook]Traversing the Ethical Minefield Problems, Law, and Professional Responsibility by Susan R. Martyn (z-lib.org)(1) (1)

7. In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1 (1966) (requiring counsel for juvenile proceedings that may lead to commitment in state
institutions).
8. United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez, 548 U.S. 140 (2006).
9. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984).
10. United States v. Cronic, 466 U.S. 648 (1984).
11. Strickland, 466 U.S. at 685. The defendant also has the alternative of representing herself, if she knowingly and
intelligently waives her Sixth Amendment right. Standby counsel can be appointed to assist the defendant. See Faretta v.
California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975).
12. ABA Formal Op. 06-441 (Ethical Obligations of Lawyers Who Represent Indigent Criminal
Defendants When Excessive Caseloads Interfere with Competent and Diligent Representation).
13. See, e.g., Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356 (2010) (failure of defense counsel to give correct advice about the
immigration consequences of a guilty plea); Sears v. Upton, 561 U.S. 945 (2010) (constitutionally deficient mitigation
investigation in capital case).
14. See, e.g., Lee v. United States, 137 S. Ct. 1958 (2017) (when defense counsel’s deficient performance deprived
defendant of a trial by accepting guilty plea, prejudice can be shown by demonstrating that defendant would have gone
to trial).
15. United States v. Cronic, 466 U.S. 648, 658 (1984). The “sleeping lawyer” cases illustrate the significant proof
required to reach this threshold. When defense lawyers occasionally nap during a trial, courts have held that one episode
of inattention or sleep is not enough to presume prejudice, e.g., Fellman v. Poole, 1994 WL 447275 (9th Cir.).
However, repeated periods of unconsciousness during a substantial portion of the trial creates a presumption of
prejudice. United States v. Ragin, 820 F.3d 609 (4th Cir. 2016).
16. MR 1.3, Comment [4]; RLGL § 16.
17. RLGL § 22(1); Roe v. Flores-Ortega, 528 U.S. 470 (2000).
18. E.g., Missouri v. Frye, 566 U.S. 133 (2012).
19. Lafler v. Cooper, 566 U.S. 156 (2012).
20. E.g., Ross v. Kemp, 393 S.E.2d 244 (Ga. 1990) (the decision whether or not to testify).
21. See Wayne L. LaFave, Jerold H. Israel, Nancy J. King, Orin S. Kerr, Criminal Procedure (6th ed. West 2016) at
§ 11.9.
22. MR 3.3(a)(3); RLGL § 120.
23. LaFave, supra note 21.
24. See, e.g., State v. Veale, 919 A.2d 794 (N.H. 2007) (reviewing per se, actual conflict and hybrid approaches to
disqualification of appellate counsel).
25. 435 U.S. 475 (1978).
26. The trial judge can grant a motion to disqualify defense counsel if necessary to guarantee a fair trial. See, e.g.,
United States v. Edwards, 39 F. Supp. 2d 716 (M.D. La. 1999).
27. Cuyler v. Sullivan, 446 U.S. 335 (1980). See, e.g., Mickens v. Taylor, 535 U.S. 162 (2002) (when previous
representation of the victim was not raised on the record, prejudice was not presumed even when the defendant was
unaware of the conflict and it was known by the prosecutor, defense lawyer, and the trial judge).
28. United States v. Fulton, 5 F.3d 605 (2d Cir. 1993).
29. E.g., Moss v. United States, 323 F.3d 445 (6th Cir. 2003).
30. Walberg v. Israel, 766 F.2d 1071 (7th Cir. 1985).
31. See, e.g., Eve Brensike Primus, The Illusory Right to Counsel, 37 Ohio N.U. L. Rev. 595 (2011).
32. This is especially true in death penalty cases. See Lawrence J. Fox, Capital Guidelines and Ethical Duties: Mutually
Reinforcing Responsibilities, 36 Hofstra L. Rev. 775 (2008).
33. Fields v. Bagley, 275 F.3d 478 (6th Cir. 2001).
34. E.g., Florida v. Nixon, 543 U.S. 175 (2004); State v. Carter, 14 P.3d 1138 (Kan. 2000).
35. E.g., People v. Bass, 636 N.W.2d 781 (Mich. App. 2001) (defense counsel had no memory of trial, lost most of
the file, and offered no reason for failing to call witnesses).
36. E.g., Rompilla v. Beard, 545 U.S. 374 (2005).
37. E.g., Kimmelman v. Morrison, 477 U.S. 365 (1986) (mistake as to defense counsel’s obligation to request
discovery).
38. See, e.g., Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356 (2010).
150