Citation network
Nix Vs. Whiteside
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Feb 26, 1986
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
U.S. 157 (1986) U.S. Supreme Court Nix v. WhitesideSearch
-
U.S. 157 (1986) Nix v. WhitesideSearch
-
standards set forth in Strickland v. WashingtonSearch
-
with the defendant in presenting perjured testimony at his trial. Pp. 475 U. S. 164 -176. (a) Strickland v. WashingtonSearch
-
that the facts were as related by Robinson. The Supreme Court of Iowa affirmed respondent's conviction. State v. WhitesideSearch
-
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit reversed and directed that the writ of habeas corpus be granted. Whiteside v. ScurrSearch
-
that trial counsel believed with good cause that Whiteside would testify falsely, and acknowledged that, under Harris v. NewSearch
-
threatened violation of client confidences breached the standards of effective representation set down in Strickland v. WashingtonSearch
-
duties. A petition for rehearing en banc was denied, with Judges Gibson, Ross, Fagg, and Bowman dissenting. Whiteside v. ScurrSearch
-
from giving sworn testimony at their own trial by reason of their interest as a party to the case. See, e.g., Ferguson v. GeorgiaSearch
-
of American Law 59-60 (2d ed.1959). Iowa was among the states that adhered to this rule of disqualification. State v. LafferSearch
-
his own behalf, cases in several Circuits have so held, and the right has long been assumed. See, e.g., United States v. CurtisSearch
-
United States v. BifieldSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
that such a right exists as a corollary to the Fifth Amendment privilege against compelled testimony, see Harris v. NewSearch
-
id. at 365 U. S. 601 -603 (concurring opinion of Clark, J.). B In Strickland v. WashingtonSearch
-
Professional Ethics and Conduct of Iowa State Bar Assn. v. CrarySearch
-
right to testify, it is elementary that such a right does not extend to testifying falsely. In Harris v. NewSearch
-
hat privilege cannot be construed to include the right to commit perjury. See United States v. KnoxSearch
-
Dennis v. UnitedSearch
-
we held the defendant could be impeached by prior contrary statements which had been ruled inadmissible under Miranda v. ArizonaSearch
-
is no right whatever -- constitutional or otherwise -- for a defendant to use false evidence. See also United States v. HavensSearch
-
of neither his right to counsel nor the right to Page 475 U. S. 174 testify truthfully. In United States v. HavensSearch
-
s admission of guilt, does not extend to a client's announced plans to engage in future criminal conduct. See Clark v. UnitedSearch
-
requirement of Strickland, Whiteside relies on cases involving conflicting loyalties of counsel. In Cuyler v. SullivanSearch
-
This is not remotely the kind of conflict of interests dealt with in Cuyler v. SullivanSearch
-
to call the defendant was based on the attorney's belief that the defendant would commit perjury. United States v. CurtisSearch
-
state any basis for her belief that defendant's proposed alibi testimony was perjured. United States ex rel. Wilcox v. JohnsonSearch
-
F.2d 115 (1977). See also Lowery v. CardwellSearch
-
courts treating the subject rejected this approach and insisted on a more rigorous standard, see, e.g., United States v. CurtisSearch
-
McKissick v. UnitedSearch
-
Dodd v. FloridaSearch
-
standards. Whiteside v. ScurrSearch
-
Lowery v. CardwellSearch
-
See United States v. CurtisSearch
-
Professional Ethics v. CrarySearch
-
State v. RobinsonSearch
-
Thornton v. UnitedSearch
-
State v. HendersonSearch
-
Hinds v. StateSearch
-
Bar, 19 Cal.2d 87, 119 P.2d 134 (1941). Contra, Whiteside v. ScurrSearch
-
I agree that respondent has failed to prove the kind of prejudice necessary to make out a claim under Strickland v. WashingtonSearch
-
App. 57. The Iowa Supreme Court affirmed. State v. WhitesideSearch
-
to Pet. for Cert. A41. Page 475 U. S. 181 The Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit reversed. Whiteside v. ScurrSearch
-
and confidentiality on Whiteside's limiting his testimony. The court recognized that, under Strickland v. WashingtonSearch
-
unreasonable and that he was prejudiced by his attorney's unprofessional behavior. But it noted that Strickland v. WashingtonSearch
-
conflict of interest that adversely affects his performance, see id. at 466 U. S. 692 , quoting Cuyler v. SullivanSearch
-
F.2d at 1330. Petitioner's motion for rehearing en banc was denied by a vote of 5 to 4. Whiteside v. ScurrSearch
-
Gibson, joined by Judges Ross, Fagg, and Bowman, argued that Whiteside had failed to show cognizable prejudice. Cuyler v. SullivanSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial