While a criminal defendant has a Sixth Amendment right to assistance from counsel, you can't always force a client to follow legal advice, even good advice. Take Raymon Walters, who was preparing for trial on charges being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 USC 922(g)(1). Mr. Walters had been convicted on various drug charges previously, so his attorney decided to stipulate that his client knew he was a felon (and limit the government's opportunity to present evidence on this fact to the jury). Mr. Waters objected to admitting these easily proven facts so the government objected to the stipulation, arguing counsel could not admit to an element of the crime over the client's objection.  The court agreed, allowing prosecutors to introduce evidence of Mr. Walters prior drug convictions and prison records. 

On appeal, the Third Circuit ruled that while counsel can make strategic decisions alone, defense objectives are left to the client and admitting guilt is an objective, not a strategy.  It therefore concluded that because the government must prove each element of an offense beyond a reasonable doubt, the defendant has the right to insist that the government carry its burden for each element and counsel cannot confess to one of them without the client's consent. (The court acknowledged a limited exception that allows counsel to admit jurisdictional facts - such as whether a financial institution is federally insured - without client approval, but that exception did not apply to Mr. Walters.) Perhaps it would not have mattered to the outcome of Mr. Walters case but had the right not to follow his lawyer's good advice.  United States v. Walters, No. 22-1812 (3rd Cir. Sept. 4, 2025).