David Asa Villarreal v. Texas, USSC No. 24-557, certiorari granted 4/7/25
SCOTUS added to its 2025-26 docket this week when it granted the petitioner’s cert. petition to address the following:
Whether a trial court abridges the defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to counsel by prohibiting the defendant and his counsel from discussing the defendant’s testimony during an overnight recess.
Decision below: Villarreal v. State, No. PD-0048-20 (Tex. Crim. App. Oct. 9, 2024)
Scotusblog page (including links to briefs and commentary)
Villarreal asked SCOTUS to resolve a conflict among state and federal courts regarding the interplay between Geders v. United States, 425 U.S. 80 (1976), and Perry v. Leeke, 488 U.S. 272 (1989). In Geders, the Court held that the trial court violated the defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to the assistance of counsel when it directed him not to consult with his attorney during an overnight recess, which was called while Geders was testifying at trial on direct examination. Perry, however, held that the trial court did not deny the defendant his right to the assistance of counsel when it prohibited him from consulting with his attorney during a 15-minute recess in the middle of his trial testimony. Here, Villarreal was prohibited from discussing his testimony with counsel during the overnight recess, but not other matters.
We are unaware of any Wisconsin cases to address this issue, but the Seventh Circuit held, under similar facts as Villarreal, that the trial court may not prohibit counsel and client from discussing the client’s ongoing testimony during a substantial recess. United States v. Santos, 201 F.3d 953 (7th Cir. 2000).
