“At the beginning of his opening statement at the guilt
phase of the trial, English told the jury there was “no way
reasonably possible” that they could hear the prosecution’s
evidence and reach “any other conclusion than Robert
McCoy was the cause of these individuals’ death.” “ (Opinion page 4).
Guilt phase is the trial on the merits. Sentencing phase is after a guilty verdict has been reached and there is a short “trial” to consider the death penalty (must be unanimous) or life (any non-unanimous verdict).
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/16-8255_i4ek.pdf
From what you write, it would seem that that his trial was a travesty, but I don’t know how to reconcile what you write with the dissent’s claim that English didn’t really admit McCoy’s guilt in trial court.
I read the case, and Alito’s position seems really weird. He says that the complaint is that the defendent is entitled to a lawyer insisting, “not guilty,” but not suborning perjury, especially when doing so will destory credibility in the sentencing phase. He claims that the lawyer insisting “not guilty” by means of lacking mens rea is as valid as “not guilty” by didn’t do it, and that if the client objected, he had had plenty of time ealier to object.
But the weird thing is that English actually seems to have plead guilty in the first degree, simply hoping to seek mercy in the sentencing phase. That totally contradicts Alito’s argument.
It’s almost as if Alito and Thomas WANT to lose a few cases with extremely narrow precedents. I could speculate why.