United States v. Hearst

Patricia Hearst (defendant) hired attorneys F. Lee Bailey and J. Albert Johnson to represent Hearst in connection with bank-robbery charges. The case was a matter of significant public interest. Shortly before the beginning of the trial, Bailey received an offer to publish a book concerning the Hearst trial. The publishing offer was contingent on Hearst’s agreement not to publish a book of her own for 18 months after the publication of Bailey’s book. Hearst alleged that Bailey told her that he would write a book about her as part of the fee arrangement Bailey made with Hearst’s parents. Following the trial, Hearst was convicted for bank robbery. Two days after Hearst’s conviction, Johnson brought a document for Hearst to sign, agreeing that Hearst would not publish a book about her trial for 18 months. Hearst then filed a habeas corpus motion, arguing that Bailey’s book deal created a conflict of interest that deprived Hearst of her Sixth Amendment right to the assistance of counsel. Bailey alleged that despite significant pretrial publicity and how it might affect jurors, Bailey did not move for a change of venue or for a continuance in order not to delay the book deal and to keep the trial in San Francisco, a venue that would ensure high publicity. Further, during trial, Bailey put Hearst on the witness stand, where Hearst took the Fifth Amendment 42 times in front of the jury. Hearst alleged Bailey did this so that her story would be on the record and Bailey would not be prevented by the attorney-client privilege from using such facts in his book. The district court denied the motion, and Hearst appealed.