In a burst of new year energy, the Supreme Court on Friday added seven new cases to the term’s argument docket on issues ranging from habeas relief for an attorney’s bad advice to his client on plea bargains to the type of proof needed in a securities “fraud on the market” class action.
The seven cases round out the justices’ April argument calendar—the final month of arguments in the current term.
The Court said it will hear arguments in two cases involving plea bargains. In Lafler v. Cooper, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit found that Anthony Cooper’s Sixth Amendment rights were violated. Cooper’s lawyer advised him to reject a plea bargain based on a misunderstanding of Michigan law and he was subsequently convicted of assault with intent to murder. The other case is Missouri v. Frye, an ineffective assistance of counsel challenge in which the defendant’s lawyer failed to communicate a plea offer.
The securities case—Erica P. John Fund v. Halliburton Co.—asks whether plaintiffs in securities fraud actions must establish loss causation at class certification by a preponderance of admissible evidence without merits discovery.
The justices also agreed to hear arguments in a challenge involving Vermont’s law protecting the confidentiality of doctors’ prescription drug records of their patients. That case is Sorrell v. IMS Health Inc.
The other cases granted review are: Nevada Commission on Ethics v. Carrigan; U.S. v. Jicarilla Apache Nation (an attorney-client privilege challenge) and McNeill v. U.S. (an Armed Career Criminal Act case).