Sentenza

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES No. 11–9953 JONATHAN EDWARD BOYER, PETITIONER v. LOUISIANA ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF LOUISIANA , THIRD CIRCUI

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
No. 11–9953
JONATHAN EDWARD BOYER, PETITIONER
v.
LOUISIANA
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF
LOUISIANA
,
THIRD CIRCUIT
[April 29, 2013]
P
ER
C
URIAM
.
The writ of certiorari is dismissed as improvidently
granted.
It is so ordered.
1
Cite as: 569 U. S. ____ (2013)
A
LITO
,
J., concurring
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
No. 11–9953
JONATHAN EDWARD BOYER, PETITIONER
v.
LOUISIANA
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF
LOUISIANA
,
THIRD CIRCUIT
[April 29, 2013]
J
USTICE
A
LITO
, with whom J
USTICE
S
CALIA
and J
USTICE
T
HOMAS
join, concurring.
We granted certiorari in this case to decide “[w]hether a
state's failure to fund counsel for an indigent defendant for
five years, particularly where failure was the direct result
of the prosecution's choice to seek the death penalty,
should be weighed against the state for speedy trial pur
-
poses.” Pet. for Cert. i. The premise of that question is
that a breakdown in Louisiana's system for paying the
attorneys representing petitioner, an indigent defendant
who was charged with a capital offense, caused most of
the lengthy delay between his arrest and trial. Because the
record shows otherwise, I agr
ee that the writ of certiorari
was improvidently granted.
In February 2002, petitioner and his brother were
hitchhiking in Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana. Petitioner
robbed and murdered a driver who picked them up. After
enlisting his brother to help him cover up the crime, peti
-
tioner fled to Florida, where he was captured about a
month later. The evidence of petitioner's guilt was over
-
whelming. He gave the police a detailed statement de
-
scribing the murder; his brothe
r, an eyewitness, agreed to
testify about the crime; multiple other members of peti
-
tioner's family told police that they had heard petitioner
confess; and petitioner's fing
erprints were found in the
2
BOYER
v.
LOUISIANA
A
LITO
,
J., concurring
victim's truck.
Louisiana prosecutors announced that they would seek
the death penalty, and the state court appointed Thomas
Lorenzi, an experienced trial attorney, to serve as peti
-
tioner's primary defense counsel
. For the next five years,
Mr. Lorenzi led petitioner's defense, but he was assisted at
all times by at least one highly credentialed but less expe
-
rienced attorney from the Louisiana Capital Assistance
Center (LCAC).
The attorneys from the LCAC were paid by the State,
but there was confusion about which branch of the state
government was responsible for paying Mr. Lorenzi's fees.
The trial court promptly scheduled a hearing on that pre
-
liminary matter, but the hearing was repeatedly put off
at the urging of the defense. Over the course of more
than three years, the defense requested that the hearing
be continued on eight separate occasions, causing a total
delay of approximately 20 months
.
The trial court also
issued several other continuances without any objection
from the defense, delaying the hearing an additional 15
months. And just when it seemed that the hearing would
finally be held, Hurricane Rita forced the Calcasieu Parish
Courthouse to close.
The trial court held the hearing on March 27, 2006, and
at that time it became clear
that Mr. Lorenzi's fees could
not be fully paid until the start of the next fiscal year. Ten
months later, the State broke the resulting impasse by
announcing that it would no longer seek the death pen-
alty. That greatly reduced the complexity and cost of peti-
tioner's defense and allowed his case to proceed. Mr.
Lorenzi withdrew, and attorneys from the LCAC accepted
the role of lead counsel.
From that point, the case pr
oceeded at a plodding pace.
Petitioner filed voluminous pretrial motions, took multiple
interlocutory appeals, and twice demanded the recusal of
the trial judge. The trial court halted proceedings for 11