Strickland v. Washington case brief summary
466 U.S. 668 (1984)
CASE SYNOPSIS:
The respondent in this case sought to review the Court of Appeal's judgment for the 11th circuit.
The respondent argued that his death sentence should have been overturned.
He stated that the "strategic decisions upon which he was advised by his attorney that took place during his trial" were enough to constitute an ineffective assistance of counsel that was in violation of his right to counsel under the fourth amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
HOLDING:
Death sentence affirmed.
DISCUSSION
The Supreme Court also head that in order to show an attorney's assistance was defective enough to require a reversal of a death sentence, the respondent should be able to show that the counsel's performance was deficient.
The deficient performance must have in fact prejudiced the defense
ANALYSIS:
When applying the above standard, the Court stated that the counsel's performance could not be held to be unreasonable.
Even if the performance was unreasonable, here there was no insufficient prejudice that would warrant setting aside the death sentence.
The respondent failed to show that his sentencing proceeding was in any way fundamentally unfair.
OUTCOME:
The court affirmed the respondent's death sentence.
The respondent's counsel's performance could not be found unreasonable.
Even if it was unreasonable, the respondent had not suffered the kind of prejudice that would warrant setting aside his death sentence.
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
466 U.S. 668 (1984)
CASE SYNOPSIS:
The respondent in this case sought to review the Court of Appeal's judgment for the 11th circuit.
The respondent argued that his death sentence should have been overturned.
He stated that the "strategic decisions upon which he was advised by his attorney that took place during his trial" were enough to constitute an ineffective assistance of counsel that was in violation of his right to counsel under the fourth amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
HOLDING:
Death sentence affirmed.
DISCUSSION
The Supreme Court also head that in order to show an attorney's assistance was defective enough to require a reversal of a death sentence, the respondent should be able to show that the counsel's performance was deficient.
The deficient performance must have in fact prejudiced the defense
ANALYSIS:
When applying the above standard, the Court stated that the counsel's performance could not be held to be unreasonable.
Even if the performance was unreasonable, here there was no insufficient prejudice that would warrant setting aside the death sentence.
The respondent failed to show that his sentencing proceeding was in any way fundamentally unfair.
OUTCOME:
The court affirmed the respondent's death sentence.
The respondent's counsel's performance could not be found unreasonable.
Even if it was unreasonable, the respondent had not suffered the kind of prejudice that would warrant setting aside his death sentence.
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
No comments:
Post a Comment