October Term 2011 · Docket 10-444

Does a lawyer's failure to relay a plea offer require a new trial?

Galin Frye claims his lawyer ignored a plea deal. The state argues he still chose to plead guilty.

Official caption
Missouri v. Frye
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Mr. Queener stated Frye pleaded guilty to a felony charge.

    He noted the lawyer failed to inform Frye of a misdemeanor offer.

    Mr. Koster argued Frye would have insisted on going to trial.

    He claimed Frye knowingly waived his right to a trial.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

Galin Frye pleaded guilty to a felony. He claims his lawyer hid a misdemeanor plea offer. The state says he knowingly waived his trial rights.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on October 31, 2011.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

Frye wants a new trial or resentencing based on the lost plea offer.

Missouri wants the guilty plea to stand because Frye admitted guilt.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

Frye argues his lawyer's error deprived him of a better outcome.

Missouri argues Frye would have insisted on trial even with the offer.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Sotomayor asked about the specific dates of Frye's offenses.

Chief Justice Roberts questioned why defendants might rush to accept plea deals early.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines how courts handle uncommunicated plea offers. It sets the standard for proving lawyer error caused harm. It impacts how defendants evaluate plea negotiations against trial risks.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON