Strickland v. Washington

Definition

Strickland v. Washington is a landmark U.S. Supreme Court case from 1984 that established the standard for determining whether a criminal defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel was violated due to ineffective assistance of counsel. This case set forth a two-pronged test that courts must apply when assessing claims of ineffective assistance, focusing on the performance of the attorney and the impact that performance had on the outcome of the trial.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. The case involved David Washington, who was sentenced to death in Florida, and his claim that his lawyer failed to adequately prepare for trial.
2. The Strickland test requires showing that the lawyer's performance was deficient and that this deficiency prejudiced the outcome of the trial.
3. The decision emphasized that reasonable professional judgment should guide attorneys' actions, acknowledging that not all mistakes constitute ineffective assistance.
4. Strickland v. Washington has become a foundational case in legal discussions regarding the right to counsel and has influenced numerous subsequent cases involving ineffective assistance claims.
5. This ruling underscores the importance of competent legal representation in ensuring fair trials and upholding justice within the criminal justice system.

Review Questions

• What are the two prongs of the test established in Strickland v. Washington for determining ineffective assistance of counsel?
  • The two prongs of the Strickland test are: first, whether the attorney's performance was deficient, meaning it fell below an objective standard of reasonableness; and second, whether this deficient performance prejudiced the outcome of the trial, impacting the defendant's ability to receive a fair trial. This means that defendants must not only show that their lawyer made mistakes but also demonstrate how those mistakes affected the trial's result.
• How did Strickland v. Washington change the landscape of legal representation in criminal cases?
  • Strickland v. Washington significantly changed legal representation by establishing clear criteria for evaluating claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. Prior to this case, there was no standardized method for assessing attorney performance in relation to constitutional rights. The ruling highlighted that defendants have a right to competent legal counsel and set expectations for attorneys, thereby promoting better standards within criminal defense practices and ensuring that defendants receive fair trials.
• Evaluate the broader implications of Strickland v. Washington on defendants' rights and the justice system as a whole.
  • Strickland v. Washington has far-reaching implications for defendants' rights by reinforcing the critical role of effective legal representation in achieving justice. This case not only provides a mechanism for challenging convictions based on attorney incompetence but also stresses the responsibility of courts to ensure fair trials. As a result, it has contributed to raising awareness about the importance of trained and competent attorneys in safeguarding constitutional rights, leading to reforms and better practices within the criminal justice system overall.

Related terms

Ineffective Assistance of Counsel: A legal claim raised by defendants asserting that their attorney's performance was so deficient that it undermined the fairness of the trial.

Sixth Amendment:

An amendment to the U.S. Constitution that guarantees defendants in criminal prosecutions the right to counsel, among other rights.

Habeas Corpus: A legal procedure through which a person can report an unlawful detention or imprisonment before a court, often used to challenge the legality of a conviction.