United States Supreme Court
538 U.S. 500 (2003)
Massaro (defendant) was indicted on federal racketeering charges, including murder. The day before his trial, prosecutors discovered a key piece of evidence, namely, a bullet found in the victim’s car. The prosecution, however, did not notify defense counsel of this development until the trial had started and the defense had made its opening statement. After the defense had been informed of the development, but still during the trial, defense counsel refused the trial court’s offer of a continuance, so that the bullet could be examined. Massaro was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment. On direct appeal and represented by new counsel, Massaro argued that the district court had erred in admitting the evidence of the bullet, but did not raise an ineffective counsel claim. The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the conviction. Massaro later filed a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, seeking to vacate the conviction, because he claimed that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance of counsel since his counsel failed to accept the trial court’s offer of a continuance. The district court found that this motion was procedurally defaulted, because Massaro could have made it on direct appeal, but did not. The Second Circuit affirmed. It held that when a defendant is represented by new counsel on appeal, as Massaro was, and he makes a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel solely on the basis of the trial record, then that claim has to be made on direct appeal. If the defendant fails to make the claim on direct appeal, the result is procedural default, unless he can show cause and prejudice. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Kennedy, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 241,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,200 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.