THE CASE, UNITED STATES V. WILLIE DECOSTER, JR., IS SAID TO DEMONSTRATE THE LENGTHS TO WHICH SOME COURTS ARE PREPARED TO GO IN ORDER TO PROTECT CRIMINAL DEFENDANTS. DECOSTER WAS ONE OF THREE MEN INDICTED AND CHARGED WITH ARMED ROBBERY AND ASSAULT WITH A DANGEROUS WEAPON. THE CRIME HAD BEEN WITNESSED BY THE POLICE. PRIOR TO THE TRIAL, DECOSTER JUMPED BAIL AND WAS REARRESTED FOR ANOTHER CRIME, FOR WHICH HE WAS LATER TRIED AND CONVICTED. IN THE INTERIM, HIS TWO CO-DEFENDANTS HAD CHANGED THEIR PLEAS TO GUILTY OF A LESSER CHARGE OF ROBBERY AND HAD BEEN PLACED ON PROBATION. DECOSTER WAS TRIED SEPARATELY, CONVICTED OF ARMED ROBBERY, AND ASSIGNED A LAWYER FROM A IS REFERRED TO IN THE ARTICLE AS A 4.5-YEAR 'APPELLATE ODYSSEY.' THE APPEAL FIRST FOCUSED ON THE SUFFICIENCY OF THE EVIDENCE IN THE CASE. IT WAS THE APPELLATE JUDGES WHO SUGGESTED THAT THE REAL ISSUE AT HAND WAS THE ADEQUACY OF DECOSTER'S DEFENSE. DECOSTER'S LAWYER HAD TAKEN HIS CLIENT'S ADVICE AND PLACED ONE OF THE CLIENT'S ACCOMPLICES ON THE WITNESS STAND. THE ACCOMPLICE UNEXPECTEDLY TESTIFIED THAT HE HAD SEEN DECOSTER FIGHTING WITH THE VICTIM. LARGELY ON THE BASIS OF THIS 'MISTAKE,' DECOSTER'S CONVICTION WAS REVERSED. IT IS SUGGESTED THAT THE APPEALS COURT ITSELF DIRECTED THE COURSE OF DECOSTER'S APPEAL AND THAT ONE JUDGE PRESUMED TO ACT AS DECOSTER'S 'EX-OFFICIO DEFENSE COUNSEL.' THE DECOSTER OPINION, SHOULD IT HOLD, IS SAID TO CARRY THE IMPLICATION THAT DEFENSE COUNSEL MUST INVESTIGATE 'THE ENTIRE UNIVERSE OF FABRICATED DEFENSES' FOR A CLIENT OR BE VULNERABLE TO CHARGES OF PREJUDICE AS GROUNDS FOR REVERSAL.