Roe v. Flores-Ortega — Souter, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part

Summary

Justice Souter concurred in part and dissented in part, arguing that counsel generally has a constitutional duty to consult with defendants about appeal rights after conviction, rather than only when specifically requested. He contended the majority's rule permits ineffective assistance by allowing counsel to ignore appeal rights when defendants lack sophistication. Justice Ginsburg and Justice Breyer filed separate opinions concurring in part.