Citation network
Strickland Vs. Washington
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- May 14, 1984
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
- Relied / Followed
-
U.S. 668 (1984) U.S. Supreme Court Strickland v. WashingtonSearch
-
U.S. 668 (1984) Strickland v. WashingtonSearch
-
See Washington v. StateSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
attack. Applying the standard for ineffectiveness claims articulated by the Florida Supreme Court in Knight v. StateSearch
-
App. to Pet. for Cert. A230. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the denial of relief. Washington v. StateSearch
-
in the District Court, the habeas petition might be characterized as a mixed petition subject to the rule of Rose v. LundySearch
-
Id. at 1253 (quoting Rummel v. EstelleSearch
-
Fayerweather v. RitchSearch
-
on state interference with the ability of counsel to render effective assistance to the accused. E.g., United States v. CronicSearch
-
ante p. 466 U. S. 648 . With the exception of Cuyler v. SullivanSearch
-
of counsel's assistance in a case going to trial. Cf. United States v. AgursSearch
-
standard in one formulation or another. See Trapnell v. UnitedSearch
-
App. B to Brief for United States in United States v. CronicSearch
-
tests that purport to differ in more than formulation. See App. C to Brief for United States in United States v. CronicSearch
-
expressly rejected the prejudice standard articulated by Judge Leventhal in his plurality opinion in United States v. DecosterSearch
-
en banc), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 944 (1979), and adopted by the State of Florida in Knight v. StateSearch
-
rule requiring dismissal of mixed petitions, though to be strictly enforced, is not jurisdictional. See Rose v. LundySearch
-
We therefore address the merits of the constitutional issue. II In a long line of cases that includes Powell v. AlabamaSearch
-
U. S. 45 (1932), Johnson v. ZerbstSearch
-
U. S. 458 (1938), and Gideon v. WainwrightSearch
-
to which they are entitled. Adams v. UnitedSearch
-
Powell v. AlabamaSearch
-
federal or state crime has the right to have counsel appointed if retained counsel cannot be obtained. See Algersinger v. HamlinSearch
-
ways with the ability of counsel to make independent decisions about how to conduct the defense. See, e.g., Geders v. UnitedSearch
-
Herring v. NewSearch
-
in its adversarial format and in the existence of standards for decision, See Barclay Page 466 U. S. 687 v. FloridaSearch
-
have now held, the proper standard for attorney performance is that of reasonably effective assistance. See Trapnell v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 725 F.2d at 151-152. The Court indirectly recognized as much when it stated in McMann v. RichardsonSearch
-
Cuyler v. SullivanSearch
-
law's presumption that counsel will fulfill the role in the adversary process that the Amendment envisions. See Michel v. LouisianaSearch
-
the defendant, and hence counsel owes the client a duty of loyalty, a duty to avoid conflicts of interest. See Cuyler v. SullivanSearch
-
to bring to bear such skill and knowledge as will render the trial a reliable adversarial testing process. See Powell v. AlabamaSearch
-
of counsel and restrict the wide latitude counsel must have in making tactical decisions. See United States v. DecosterSearch
-
after it has proved unsuccessful, to conclude that a particular act or omission of counsel was unreasonable. Cf. Engle v. IsaacSearch
-
See Michel v. LouisianaSearch
-
just as it may be critical to a proper assessment of counsel's other litigation decisions. See United States v. DecosterSearch
-
setting aside the judgment of a criminal proceeding if the error had no effect on the judgment. Cf. United States v. MorrisonSearch
-
to result in prejudice. So are various kinds of state interference with counsel's assistance. See United States v. CronicSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial