Does the Sixth Amendment holding of McCoy v. Louisiana apply to a penalty phase capital trial?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED This Court held in McCoy v. Louisiana, 138 S. Ct. 1500 (2018) that the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees criminal defendants full autonomy to decide the objective of their defense, including whether to admit to heinous conduct charged against them. Consequentially, an attorney may not unilaterally “admit her client’s guilt of a charged crime” or particular conduct “over the client’s intransigent objection to that admission,” even when “counsel’s experienced-based view is that confessing guilt offers the defendant the best chance to avoid the death penalty.” Jd. at 1505, 1510. This Sixth Amendment guarantee protects a criminal defendant from having counsel usurp control of an issue within the defendant’s sole prerogative. The questions presented are: 1. Does the Sixth Amendment holding of McCoy v. Louisiana, 138 S. Ct. 1500 (2018) apply to a penalty phase capital trial to protect a defendant’s autonomy over the objectives of his defense by preventing defense counsel from falsely admitting that the client engaged in more heinous conduct than the client admitted in a limited guilty plea, resulting in a death sentence? 2. Should this Court grant certiorari and accept merits briefing on Question 1 or summarily reverse the judgment below and remand for further proceedings not inconsistent with McCoy v. Louisiana, 138 8. Ct. 1500 (2018)? ii RELATED CASES State of Tennessee v. Preston Carter, Nos. 93-09760 & 93-09761, Criminal Court of Tennessee for the Thirtieth Judicial District at Memphis, judgment entered Aug. 31, 2000. State of Tennessee v. Preston Carter, No. W202204-CCA-R3-DD, Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals, judgment entered Feb. 8, 2002. State of Tennessee v. Preston Carter, No. W202204-SC-DDT-DD, Tennessee Supreme Court, judgment entered Sept. 18, 2003. Preston Carter v. State of Tennessee, No. 03-8068, U.S. Supreme Court, petition for certiorari denied Mar. 1, 2004. State of Tennessee v. Akil Jahi, Nos. 93-09760, 9309761 & P-28413, Criminal Court of Tennessee for the Thirtieth Judicial District at Memphis, judgment entered Oct. 14, 2011. Akil Jahi v. State of Tennessee, No. Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals, judgment entered Mar. 13, 2014. Akil Jahi v. State of Tennessee, No. Tennessee Supreme Court, judgment entered Sept. 18, 2014. Akil Jahi v. Wayne Carpenter, Warden, No. 14-2791, U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee, filed Oct. 14, 2014 (stayed). iii State of Tennessee v. Akil Jahi, Nos. 93-09760, 9309761 & P-28413, Criminal Court of Tennessee for the Thirtieth Judicial District at Memphis, judgment entered Sept. 29, 2016. Akil Jahi v. State of Tennessee, No. Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals, judgment entered Aug. 1, 2017. Preston Carter n.k.a Akil Jahi v. State of Tennessee, Nos. 93-09760, 9383-09761 & P-28413, Criminal Court of Tennessee for the Thirtieth Judicial District at Memphis, judgment entered Nov. 27, 2017. Akil Jahi v. State of Tennessee, No. Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals, judgment entered Apr. 24, 2018. Akil Jahi v. State of Tennessee, No. Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals, judgment entered May 21, 2018. Akil Jahi v. State of Tennessee, No. Tennessee Supreme Court, judgment entered Sept. 17, 2018. Akhil Jahi v. State of Tennessee, No. 18-1077, United States Supreme Court, petition for writ of certiorari denied, Apr. 29, 2019. Preston Carter n.k.a Akil Jahi v. State of Tennessee, Nos. 93-09760, 9383-09761 & P-28413, Criminal Court of Tennessee for the Thirtieth Judicial District at Memphis, judgment entered June 5, 2020. iv Akil Jahi v. State of Tennessee, No. Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals, judgment entered Aug. 31, 2020. Akil Jahi v. State of Tennessee, No. Tennessee Supreme Court, judgment entered Jan. 1, 2021.