Godinez v. Mora

509 U.S. 389 (1993)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

D entered the Red Pearl Saloon and shot the bartender and a patron four times each with an automatic pistol. D then walked behind the bar and took the cash register. Nine days later, D arrived at the house of his former wife and opened fire. Five of seven shots hit their target, and then D shot himself in the abdomen and attempted to slit his wrists. All the victims died. From his hospital bed, D confessed to the killings. D then pled not guilty to three counts of first-degree murder. The trial court then ordered him examined and both psychiatrists determined that he was competent to stand trial. About 2.5 months later, D appeared before the trial court and informed the court that he was discharging his attorneys and changing his plea to not guilty. The trial court, on the basis of the psychiatric reports, found that he was competent. The trial court then carefully examined the guilty pleas and explicitly found that D knowingly and intelligently waived his right to assistance to counsel and that the guilty pleas were freely and voluntarily given. D was sentenced to death. D then filed for post-conviction relief in state court. The trial court rejected D's claim that he was mentally incompetent. D then filed a habeas petition. The District Court denied the petition, but the Ninth Circuit reversed; competency to waive constitutional rights requires a higher level of mental functioning than that required to stand trial. To waive constitutional rights, D must have the capacity for reasoned choice among the alternatives available to him. From this record, the Appeals Court determined that D was not mentally capable of reasoned choice for a valid waiver of constitutional rights. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.