Strickland v. Washington

Definition

Strickland v. Washington is a landmark 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, assessing both the performance of the attorney and the impact that any deficiencies had on the outcome of the trial. It fundamentally shaped the landscape of criminal defense and appeals, ensuring that defendants receive fair representation.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. The case arose when David Washington was convicted of murder in Florida and argued that his attorney failed to adequately represent him.
2. The Supreme Court ruled in a 6-3 decision that there must be a showing of both deficient performance by counsel and resultant prejudice to the defendant's case.
3. Strickland v. Washington established the 'Strickland Test,' which is used in evaluating claims of ineffective assistance of counsel in both trial and appellate courts.
4. The ruling emphasized that not all mistakes made by attorneys can lead to a claim of ineffectiveness; only those that impact the fairness of the trial are significant.
5. This case reinforced the importance of effective legal representation and has led to numerous appeals and reviews based on claims of ineffective assistance since its ruling.

Review Questions

• How did Strickland v. Washington change the standards for assessing ineffective assistance of counsel?
  • Strickland v. Washington established a two-pronged test to assess claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. The first prong requires showing that the attorney's performance was deficient, meaning it fell below an objective standard of reasonableness. The second prong requires demonstrating that this deficiency affected the outcome of the trial, meaning there is a reasonable probability that, but for the attorney's unprofessional errors, the result would have been different.
• Discuss how Strickland v. Washington relates to defendants' rights under the Sixth Amendment.
  • Strickland v. Washington is directly tied to defendants' rights under the Sixth Amendment, which guarantees the right to legal counsel. The Supreme Court's decision clarified that ineffective assistance of counsel could violate this right if it significantly impacted the fairness of a trial. The case underscored the necessity for attorneys to meet certain professional standards in order for defendants to have a fair chance at justice.
• Evaluate how the ruling in Strickland v. Washington has influenced post-conviction appeals in criminal cases.
  • The ruling in Strickland v. Washington has had a profound impact on post-conviction appeals by providing a clear framework for defendants to challenge their convictions based on claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. This has led to an increase in appeals being filed on these grounds, as attorneys now have a structured test to evaluate their predecessors' performance. Courts have since scrutinized trial representations more closely, ensuring that defendants are provided with adequate legal support throughout their cases, reinforcing the principle of due process in criminal proceedings.

Related terms

Ineffective Assistance of Counsel: A legal claim raised by defendants asserting that their attorney's performance was so poor that it deprived them of their right to a fair trial.

Sixth Amendment:

An amendment to the United States Constitution that guarantees the rights of criminal defendants, including the right to a speedy trial, an impartial jury, and legal counsel.

Due Process:

A constitutional guarantee that prevents the government from unfairly or arbitrarily depriving individuals of life, liberty, or property.