strickland
washington
argued
january
decided
may
respondent
pleaded
guilty
florida
trial
indictment
included
three
capital
murder
charges
plea
colloquy
respondent
told
trial
judge
although
committed
string
burglaries
significant
prior
criminal
record
time
criminal
spree
extreme
stress
caused
inability
support
family
trial
judge
told
respondent
great
deal
respect
people
willing
step
forward
admit
responsibility
preparing
sentencing
hearing
defense
counsel
spoke
respondent
background
seek
character
witnesses
request
psychiatric
examination
counsel
decision
present
evidence
concerning
respondent
character
emotional
state
reflected
judgment
advisable
rely
plea
colloquy
evidence
matters
thus
preventing
state
respondent
presenting
psychiatric
evidence
counsel
request
presentence
report
included
respondent
criminal
history
thereby
undermined
claim
significant
prior
criminal
record
finding
numerous
aggravating
circumstances
mitigating
circumstance
trial
judge
sentenced
respondent
death
murder
counts
florida
affirmed
respondent
sought
collateral
relief
state
ground
inter
alia
counsel
rendered
ineffective
assistance
sentencing
proceeding
several
respects
including
failure
request
psychiatric
report
investigate
present
character
witnesses
seek
presentence
report
trial
denied
relief
florida
affirmed
respondent
filed
habeas
corpus
petition
federal
district
advancing
numerous
grounds
relief
including
claim
ineffective
assistance
counsel
evidentiary
hearing
district
denied
relief
concluding
although
counsel
made
errors
judgment
failing
investigate
mitigating
evidence
prejudice
respondent
sentence
resulted
error
judgment
appeals
ultimately
reversed
stating
sixth
amendment
accorded
criminal
defendants
right
counsel
rendering
reasonably
effective
assistance
given
totality
circumstances
outlining
standards
judging
whether
defense
counsel
fulfilled
duty
investigate
nonstatutory
mitigating
circumstances
whether
counsel
errors
sufficiently
prejudicial
justify
reversal
appeals
remanded
case
application
standards
held
sixth
amendment
right
counsel
right
effective
assistance
counsel
benchmark
judging
claim
ineffectiveness
must
whether
counsel
conduct
undermined
proper
functioning
adversarial
process
trial
relied
produced
result
principle
applies
capital
sentencing
proceeding
one
provided
florida
law
sufficiently
like
trial
adversarial
format
existence
standards
decision
counsel
role
proceeding
comparable
counsel
role
trial
pp
convicted
defendant
claim
counsel
assistance
defective
require
reversal
conviction
setting
aside
death
sentence
requires
defendant
show
first
counsel
performance
deficient
second
deficient
performance
prejudiced
defense
deprive
defendant
fair
trial
pp
proper
standard
judging
attorney
performance
reasonably
effective
assistance
considering
circumstances
convicted
defendant
complains
ineffectiveness
counsel
assistance
defendant
must
show
counsel
representation
fell
objective
standard
reasonableness
judicial
scrutiny
counsel
performance
must
highly
deferential
fair
assessment
attorney
performance
requires
every
effort
made
eliminate
distorting
effects
hindsight
reconstruct
circumstances
counsel
challenged
conduct
evaluate
conduct
counsel
perspective
time
must
indulge
strong
presumption
counsel
conduct
falls
within
wide
range
reasonable
professional
assistance
standards
require
special
amplification
order
define
counsel
duty
investigate
duty
issue
case
pp
regard
required
showing
prejudice
proper
standard
requires
defendant
show
reasonable
probability
counsel
unprofessional
errors
result
proceeding
different
reasonable
probability
probability
sufficient
undermine
confidence
outcome
hearing
ineffectiveness
claim
must
consider
totality
evidence
judge
jury
pp
number
practical
considerations
important
application
standards
set
forth
standards
establish
mechanical
rules
ultimate
focus
inquiry
must
fundamental
fairness
proceeding
whose
result
challenged
need
first
determine
whether
counsel
performance
deficient
examining
prejudice
suffered
defendant
result
alleged
deficiencies
easier
dispose
ineffectiveness
claim
ground
lack
sufficient
prejudice
course
followed
principles
governing
ineffectiveness
claims
apply
federal
collateral
proceedings
direct
appeal
motions
new
trial
federal
habeas
challenge
state
criminal
judgment
state
conclusion
counsel
rendered
effective
assistance
finding
fact
binding
federal
extent
stated
mixed
question
law
fact
pp
facts
case
make
clear
counsel
conduct
respondent
sentencing
proceeding
found
unreasonable
standards
also
make
clear
even
assuming
counsel
conduct
unreasonable
respondent
suffered
insufficient
prejudice
warrant
setting
aside
death
sentence
pp
delivered
opinion
burger
white
blackmun
powell
rehnquist
stevens
joined
brennan
filed
opinion
concurring
part
dissenting
part
post
marshall
filed
dissenting
opinion
post
carolyn
snurkowski
assistant
attorney
general
florida
argued
cause
petitioners
briefs
jim
smith
attorney
general
calvin
fox
assistant
attorney
general
richard
shapiro
argued
cause
respondent
brief
joseph
rodriguez
briefs
amici
curiae
urging
reversal
filed
solicitor
general
lee
assistant
attorney
general
trott
deputy
solicitor
general
frey
edwin
kneedler
state
alabama
et
al
mike
greely
attorney
general
montana
john
maynard
assistant
attorney
general
charles
graddick
attorney
general
alabama
robert
corbin
attorney
general
arizona
john
steven
clark
attorney
general
arkansas
john
van
de
kamp
attorney
general
california
duane
woodard
attorney
general
colorado
austin
mcguigan
chief
state
attorney
connecticut
michael
bowers
attorney
general
georgia
tany
hong
attorney
general
hawaii
jim
jones
attorney
general
idaho
linley
pearson
attorney
general
indiana
robert
stephan
attorney
general
kansas
steven
beshear
attorney
general
kentucky
william
guste
attorney
general
louisiana
james
tierney
attorney
general
maine
stephen
sachs
attorney
general
maryland
francis
bellotti
attorney
general
massachusetts
frank
kelley
attorney
general
michigan
hubert
humphrey
iii
attorney
general
minnesota
william
allain
attorney
general
mississippi
john
ashcroft
attorney
general
missouri
paul
douglas
attorney
general
nebraska
brian
mckay
attorney
general
nevada
irwin
kimmelman
attorney
general
new
jersey
paul
bardacke
attorney
general
new
mexico
rufus
edmisten
attorney
general
north
carolina
robert
wefald
attorney
general
north
dakota
anthony
celebrezze
attorney
general
ohio
michael
turpen
attorney
general
oklahoma
dave
frohnmayer
attorney
general
oregon
leroy
zimmerman
attorney
general
pennsylvania
dennis
roberts
ii
attorney
general
rhode
island
travis
medlock
attorney
general
south
carolina
mark
meierhenry
attorney
general
south
dakota
william
leech
attorney
general
tennessee
david
wilkinson
attorney
general
utah
john
easton
attorney
general
vermont
gerald
baliles
attorney
general
virginia
kenneth
eikenberry
attorney
general
washington
chauncey
browning
attorney
general
west
virginia
archie
mcclintock
attorney
general
wyoming
washington
legal
foundation
daniel
popeo
paul
kamenar
nicholas
calio
richard
wilson
charles
sims
burt
neuborne
filed
brief
national
legal
aid
defender
association
et
al
amici
curiae
urging
affirmance
justice
delivered
opinion
case
requires
us
consider
proper
standards
judging
criminal
defendant
contention
constitution
requires
conviction
death
sentence
set
aside
counsel
assistance
trial
sentencing
ineffective
period
september
respondent
planned
committed
three
groups
crimes
included
three
brutal
stabbing
murders
torture
kidnaping
severe
assaults
attempted
murders
attempted
extortion
theft
two
accomplices
arrested
respondent
surrendered
police
voluntarily
gave
lengthy
statement
confessing
third
criminal
episodes
state
florida
indicted
respondent
kidnaping
murder
appointed
experienced
criminal
lawyer
represent
counsel
actively
pursued
pretrial
motions
discovery
cut
efforts
short
however
experienced
sense
hopelessness
case
learned
specific
advice
respondent
also
confessed
first
two
murders
date
set
trial
respondent
subject
indictment
three
counts
murder
multiple
counts
robbery
kidnaping
ransom
breaking
entering
assault
attempted
murder
conspiracy
commit
robbery
respondent
waived
right
jury
trial
acting
counsel
advice
pleaded
guilty
charges
including
three
capital
murder
charges
plea
colloquy
respondent
told
trial
judge
although
committed
string
burglaries
significant
prior
criminal
record
time
criminal
spree
extreme
stress
caused
inability
support
family
app
also
stated
however
accepted
responsibility
crimes
trial
judge
told
respondent
great
deal
respect
people
willing
step
forward
admit
responsibility
making
statement
likely
sentencing
decision
counsel
advised
respondent
invoke
right
florida
law
advisory
jury
capital
sentencing
hearing
respondent
rejected
advice
waived
right
chose
instead
sentenced
trial
judge
without
jury
recommendation
preparing
sentencing
hearing
counsel
spoke
respondent
background
also
spoke
telephone
respondent
wife
mother
though
follow
one
unsuccessful
effort
meet
otherwise
seek
character
witnesses
respondent
app
pet
cert
request
psychiatric
examination
since
conversations
client
gave
indication
respondent
psychological
problems
counsel
decided
present
hence
look
evidence
concerning
respondent
character
emotional
state
decision
reflected
trial
counsel
sense
hopelessness
overcoming
evidentiary
effect
respondent
confessions
gruesome
crimes
see
also
reflected
judgment
advisable
rely
plea
colloquy
evidence
respondent
background
claim
emotional
stress
plea
colloquy
communicated
sufficient
information
subjects
forgoing
opportunity
present
new
evidence
subjects
counsel
prevented
state
respondent
claim
putting
psychiatric
evidence
counsel
also
excluded
sentencing
hearing
evidence
thought
potentially
damaging
successfully
moved
exclude
respondent
rap
sheet
app
judged
presentence
report
might
prove
detrimental
helpful
included
respondent
criminal
history
thereby
undermined
claim
significant
history
criminal
activity
request
one
prepared
app
pet
cert
sentencing
hearing
counsel
strategy
based
primarily
trial
judge
remarks
plea
colloquy
well
reputation
sentencing
judge
thought
important
convicted
defendant
crime
counsel
argued
respondent
remorse
acceptance
responsibility
justified
sparing
death
penalty
counsel
also
argued
respondent
history
criminal
activity
respondent
committed
crimes
extreme
mental
emotional
disturbance
thus
coming
within
statutory
list
mitigating
circumstances
argued
respondent
spared
death
surrendered
confessed
offered
testify
codefendant
respondent
fundamentally
good
person
briefly
gone
badly
wrong
extremely
stressful
circumstances
state
put
evidence
witnesses
largely
purpose
describing
details
crimes
counsel
medical
experts
testified
manner
death
respondent
victims
trial
judge
found
several
aggravating
circumstances
respect
three
murders
found
three
murders
especially
heinous
atrocious
cruel
involving
repeated
stabbings
three
murders
committed
course
least
one
dangerous
violent
felony
since
involved
robbery
murders
pecuniary
gain
three
murders
committed
avoid
arrest
accompanying
crimes
hinder
law
enforcement
course
one
murders
respondent
knowingly
subjected
numerous
persons
grave
risk
death
deliberately
stabbing
shooting
murder
victim
sustained
severe
one
case
ultimately
fatal
injuries
respect
mitigating
circumstances
trial
judge
made
findings
three
capital
murders
first
although
admitted
evidence
prior
convictions
respondent
stated
engaged
course
stealing
case
even
respondent
significant
history
criminal
activity
aggravating
circumstances
still
clearly
far
outweigh
mitigating
factor
second
judge
found
three
crimes
respondent
suffering
extreme
mental
emotional
disturbance
appreciate
criminality
acts
third
none
victims
participant
consented
respondent
conduct
fourth
respondent
participation
crimes
neither
minor
result
duress
domination
accomplice
finally
respondent
age
considered
factor
mitigation
especially
viewed
light
respondent
planning
crimes
disposition
proceeds
various
accompanying
thefts
short
trial
judge
found
numerous
aggravating
circumstances
single
comparatively
insignificant
mitigating
circumstance
respect
three
convictions
capital
murder
trial
judge
concluded
careful
consideration
matters
presented
impels
conclusion
insufficient
mitigating
circumstances
outweigh
aggravating
circumstances
see
washington
state
quoting
trial
findings
cert
denied
therefore
sentenced
respondent
death
three
counts
murder
prison
terms
crimes
florida
upheld
convictions
sentences
direct
appeal
respondent
subsequently
sought
collateral
relief
state
numerous
grounds
among
counsel
rendered
ineffective
assistance
sentencing
proceeding
respondent
challenged
counsel
assistance
six
respects
asserted
counsel
ineffective
failed
move
continuance
prepare
sentencing
request
psychiatric
report
investigate
present
character
witnesses
seek
presentence
investigation
report
present
meaningful
arguments
sentencing
judge
investigate
medical
examiner
reports
medical
experts
support
claim
respondent
submitted
affidavits
friends
neighbors
relatives
stating
testified
asked
also
submitted
one
psychiatric
report
one
psychological
report
stating
respondent
though
influence
extreme
mental
emotional
disturbance
chronically
frustrated
depressed
economic
dilemma
time
crimes
app
see
also
trial
denied
relief
without
evidentiary
hearing
finding
record
evidence
conclusively
showed
ineffectiveness
claim
meritless
app
pet
cert
four
assertedly
prejudicial
errors
required
little
discussion
first
grounds
request
continuance
error
requesting
one
respondent
pleaded
guilty
second
failure
request
presentence
investigation
serious
error
trial
judge
discretion
grant
request
presentence
investigation
resulted
admission
respondent
rap
sheet
thus
undermined
assertion
significant
history
criminal
activity
third
argument
memorandum
given
sentencing
judge
admirable
light
overwhelming
aggravating
circumstances
absence
mitigating
circumstances
fourth
error
failure
examine
medical
examiner
reports
medical
witnesses
testifying
manner
death
respondent
victims
since
respondent
admitted
victims
died
ways
shown
unchallenged
medical
evidence
trial
dealt
greater
length
two
bases
ineffectiveness
claim
pointed
psychiatric
examination
respondent
conducted
state
order
soon
respondent
initial
arraignment
report
indication
major
mental
illness
time
crimes
moreover
reports
submitted
collateral
proceeding
state
although
respondent
chronically
frustrated
depressed
economic
dilemma
influence
extreme
mental
emotional
disturbance
three
reports
thus
directly
undermine
contention
made
sentencing
hearing
respondent
suffering
extreme
mental
emotional
disturbance
crime
spree
accordingly
counsel
reasonably
decide
seek
psychiatric
reports
indeed
relying
solely
plea
colloquy
support
emotional
disturbance
contention
counsel
denied
state
opportunity
rebut
claim
psychiatric
testimony
event
aggravating
circumstances
overwhelming
substantial
prejudice
resulted
absence
sentencing
psychiatric
evidence
offered
collateral
attack
rejected
challenge
counsel
failure
develop
present
character
evidence
much
reasons
affidavits
submitted
collateral
proceeding
showed
nothing
certain
persons
testified
respondent
basically
good
person
worried
family
financial
problems
respondent
already
testified
along
lines
plea
colloquy
moreover
respondent
admission
course
stealing
rebutted
many
factual
allegations
affidavits
reasons
sentencing
judge
stated
death
sentence
appropriate
even
respondent
significant
prior
criminal
history
substantial
prejudice
resulted
absence
sentencing
character
evidence
offered
collateral
attack
applying
standard
ineffectiveness
claims
articulated
florida
knight
state
trial
concluded
respondent
shown
counsel
assistance
reflected
substantial
serious
deficiency
measurably
competent
counsel
likely
affected
outcome
sentencing
proceeding
specifically
found
matter
law
record
affirmatively
demonstrates
beyond
doubt
even
counsel
done
things
respondent
alleged
counsel
failed
time
sentencing
even
remotest
chance
outcome
different
plain
fact
aggravating
circumstances
proved
case
completely
overwhelming
app
pet
cert
florida
affirmed
denial
relief
washington
state
essentially
reasons
given
trial
state
concluded
respondent
failed
make
prima
facie
case
either
substantial
deficiency
possible
prejudice
indeed
failed
degree
believe
point
moral
certainty
entitled
relief
respondent
claims
shown
conclusively
without
merit
obviate
need
evidentiary
hearing
respondent
next
filed
petition
writ
habeas
corpus
district
southern
district
florida
advanced
numerous
grounds
relief
among
ineffective
assistance
counsel
based
errors
except
failure
move
continuance
identified
state
district
held
evidentiary
hearing
inquire
trial
counsel
efforts
investigate
present
mitigating
circumstances
respondent
offered
affidavits
reports
submitted
state
collateral
proceedings
also
called
trial
counsel
testify
state
florida
respondent
objection
called
trial
judge
testify
district
disputed
none
state
factual
findings
concerning
trial
counsel
assistance
made
findings
consistent
state
findings
account
trial
counsel
actions
decisions
given
reflects
combined
findings
legal
issue
ineffectiveness
district
concluded
although
trial
counsel
made
errors
judgment
failing
investigate
nonstatutory
mitigating
evidence
prejudice
respondent
sentence
resulted
error
judgment
relying
part
trial
judge
testimony
also
factors
led
state
courts
find
prejudice
district
concluded
appear
likelihood
even
significant
possibility
errors
trial
counsel
affected
outcome
sentencing
proceeding
app
pet
cert
district
went
reject
respondent
grounds
relief
including
one
exhausted
state
district
considered
among
reasons
state
urged
consideration
accordingly
denied
petition
writ
habeas
corpus
appeal
panel
appeals
fifth
circuit
affirmed
part
vacated
part
remanded
instructions
apply
particular
facts
framework
analyzing
ineffectiveness
claims
developed
opinion
panel
decision
vacated
unit
former
fifth
circuit
eleventh
circuit
decided
rehear
case
en
banc
full
appeals
developed
framework
analyzing
ineffective
assistance
claims
reversed
judgment
district
remanded
case
new
factfinding
newly
announced
standards
noted
outset
respondent
raised
unexhausted
claim
evidentiary
hearing
district
habeas
petition
might
characterized
mixed
petition
subject
rule
rose
lundy
requiring
dismissal
entire
petition
held
however
exhaustion
requirement
matter
comity
rather
matter
jurisdiction
hence
admitted
exceptions
agreed
district
case
came
within
exception
mixed
petition
rule
turning
merits
appeals
stated
sixth
amendment
right
assistance
counsel
accorded
criminal
defendants
right
counsel
reasonably
likely
render
rendering
reasonably
effective
assistance
given
totality
circumstances
remarked
passing
special
standard
applies
capital
cases
one
punishment
defendant
faces
merely
one
circumstances
considered
determining
whether
counsel
reasonably
effective
addressed
respondent
contention
trial
counsel
assistance
reasonably
effective
counsel
breached
duty
investigate
nonstatutory
mitigating
circumstances
agreed
sixth
amendment
imposes
counsel
duty
investigate
reasonably
effective
assistance
must
based
professional
decisions
informed
legal
choices
made
investigation
options
observed
counsel
investigatory
decisions
must
assessed
light
information
known
time
decisions
hindsight
amount
pretrial
investigation
reasonable
defies
precise
measurement
nevertheless
putting
cases
one
side
attempted
classify
cases
presenting
issues
concerning
scope
duty
investigate
proceeding
trial
one
plausible
line
defense
concluded
counsel
must
conduct
reasonably
substantial
investigation
line
defense
since
strategic
choice
renders
investigation
unnecessary
duty
exists
counsel
relies
trial
one
line
defense
although
others
available
either
case
investigation
need
exhaustive
must
include
independent
examination
facts
circumstances
pleadings
laws
involved
quoting
rummel
estelle
scope
duty
however
depends
facts
strength
government
case
likelihood
pursuing
certain
leads
may
prove
harmful
helpful
one
plausible
line
defense
held
counsel
ideally
investigate
line
substantially
making
strategic
choice
lines
rely
trial
counsel
conducts
substantial
investigations
strategic
choices
made
result
seldom
ever
found
wanting
advocacy
art
science
adversary
system
requires
deference
counsel
informed
decisions
strategic
choices
must
respected
circumstances
based
professional
judgment
counsel
conduct
substantial
investigation
several
plausible
lines
defense
assistance
may
nonetheless
effective
counsel
may
exclude
certain
lines
defense
strategic
reasons
limitations
time
money
however
may
force
early
strategic
choices
often
based
solely
conversations
defendant
review
prosecution
evidence
strategic
choices
lines
defense
pursue
owed
deference
commensurate
reasonableness
professional
judgments
based
thus
counsel
assumptions
reasonable
given
totality
circumstances
counsel
strategy
represents
reasonable
choice
based
upon
assumptions
counsel
need
investigate
lines
defense
chosen
employ
trial
omitted
among
factors
relevant
deciding
whether
particular
strategic
choices
reasonable
experience
attorney
inconsistency
unpursued
pursued
lines
defense
potential
prejudice
taking
unpursued
line
defense
outlined
standards
judging
whether
defense
counsel
fulfilled
duty
investigate
appeals
turned
attention
question
prejudice
defense
must
shown
counsel
errors
justify
reversal
judgment
observed
cases
outright
denial
counsel
affirmative
government
interference
representation
process
inherently
prejudicial
conflicts
interest
said
special
showing
prejudice
need
made
cases
deficient
performance
counsel
government
directly
responsible
deficiencies
evidence
deficiency
may
accessible
defendant
prosecution
defendant
must
show
counsel
errors
resulted
actual
substantial
disadvantage
course
defense
standard
appeals
reasoned
compatible
cause
prejudice
standard
overcoming
procedural
defaults
federal
collateral
proceedings
discourages
insubstantial
claims
requiring
showing
virtually
always
made
conceivable
adverse
effect
defense
counsel
errors
specified
showing
prejudice
result
reversal
judgment
concluded
unless
prosecution
showed
constitutionally
deficient
performance
light
evidence
harmless
beyond
reasonable
doubt
appeals
thus
laid
tests
applied
eleventh
circuit
challenges
convictions
ground
ineffectiveness
counsel
although
judges
proposed
different
approaches
judging
ineffectiveness
claims
either
generally
raised
federal
habeas
petitions
state
prisoners
opinion
tjoflat
opinion
clark
opinion
roney
joined
fay
hill
jj
opinion
hill
although
believed
remand
necessary
case
opinion
johnson
joined
anderson
opinion
roney
joined
fay
hill
jj
opinion
hill
majority
judges
en
banc
agreed
case
remanded
application
newly
announced
standards
summarily
rejecting
respondent
claims
ineffectiveness
counsel
accordingly
reversed
judgment
district
remanded
case
remand
finally
ruled
state
trial
judge
testimony
though
admissible
extent
contains
personal
knowledge
historical
facts
expert
opinion
considered
admitted
evidence
explain
judge
mental
processes
reaching
sentencing
decision
see
fayerweather
ritch
petitioners
officials
state
florida
filed
petition
writ
certiorari
seeking
review
decision
appeals
petition
presents
type
sixth
amendment
claim
previously
considered
generality
considered
sixth
amendment
claims
based
actual
constructive
denial
assistance
counsel
altogether
well
claims
based
state
interference
ability
counsel
render
effective
assistance
accused
cronic
ante
exception
cuyler
sullivan
however
involved
claim
counsel
assistance
rendered
ineffective
conflict
interest
never
directly
fully
addressed
claim
actual
ineffectiveness
counsel
assistance
case
going
trial
cf
agurs
assessing
attorney
performance
federal
courts
appeals
state
courts
adopted
reasonably
effective
assistance
standard
one
formulation
another
see
trapnell
app
brief
cronic
pp
sarno
modern
status
rules
standards
state
courts
adequacy
defense
counsel
representation
criminal
client
yet
occasion
squarely
decide
whether
proper
standard
respect
prejudice
defendant
must
show
deficient
attorney
performance
lower
courts
adopted
tests
purport
differ
formulation
see
app
brief
cronic
supra
sarno
supra
particular
appeals
case
expressly
rejected
prejudice
standard
articulated
judge
leventhal
plurality
opinion
decoster
app
en
banc
cert
denied
adopted
state
florida
knight
state
standard
requires
showing
specified
deficient
conduct
counsel
likely
affected
outcome
proceeding
reasons
granted
certiorari
consider
standards
judge
contention
constitution
requires
criminal
judgment
overturned
actual
ineffective
assistance
counsel
agree
appeals
exhaustion
rule
requiring
dismissal
mixed
petitions
though
strictly
enforced
jurisdictional
see
rose
lundy
therefore
address
merits
constitutional
issue
ii
long
line
cases
includes
powell
alabama
johnson
zerbst
gideon
wainwright
recognized
sixth
amendment
right
counsel
exists
needed
order
protect
fundamental
right
fair
trial
constitution
guarantees
fair
trial
due
process
clauses
defines
basic
elements
fair
trial
largely
several
provisions
sixth
amendment
including
counsel
clause
criminal
prosecutions
accused
shall
enjoy
right
speedy
public
trial
impartial
jury
state
district
wherein
crime
shall
committed
district
shall
previously
ascertained
law
informed
nature
cause
accusation
confronted
witnesses
compulsory
process
obtaining
witnesses
favor
assistance
counsel
defence
vital
importance
counsel
assistance
held
certain
exceptions
person
accused
federal
state
crime
right
counsel
appointed
retained
counsel
obtained
see
argersinger
hamlin
gideon
wainwright
supra
johnson
zerbst
supra
person
happens
lawyer
present
trial
alongside
accused
however
enough
satisfy
constitutional
command
sixth
amendment
recognizes
right
assistance
counsel
envisions
counsel
playing
role
critical
ability
adversarial
system
produce
results
accused
entitled
assisted
attorney
whether
retained
appointed
plays
role
necessary
ensure
trial
fair
reason
recognized
right
counsel
right
effective
assistance
counsel
mcmann
richardson
government
violates
right
effective
assistance
interferes
certain
ways
ability
counsel
make
independent
decisions
conduct
defense
see
geders
bar
consultation
overnight
recess
herring
new
york
bar
summation
bench
trial
brooks
tennessee
requirement
defendant
first
defense
witness
ferguson
georgia
bar
direct
examination
defendant
counsel
however
also
deprive
defendant
right
effective
assistance
simply
failing
render
adequate
legal
assistance
cuyler
sullivan
actual
conflict
interest
adversely
affecting
lawyer
performance
renders
assistance
ineffective
elaborated
meaning
constitutional
requirement
effective
assistance
latter
class
cases
presenting
claims
actual
ineffectiveness
giving
meaning
requirement
however
must
take
purpose
ensure
fair
trial
guide
benchmark
judging
claim
ineffectiveness
must
whether
counsel
conduct
undermined
proper
functioning
adversarial
process
trial
relied
produced
result
principle
applies
capital
sentencing
proceeding
provided
florida
law
need
consider
role
counsel
ordinary
sentencing
may
involve
informal
proceedings
standardless
discretion
sentencer
hence
may
require
different
approach
definition
constitutionally
effective
assistance
capital
sentencing
proceeding
like
one
involved
case
however
sufficiently
like
trial
adversarial
format
existence
standards
decision
see
barclay
florida
bullington
missouri
counsel
role
proceeding
comparable
counsel
role
trial
ensure
adversarial
testing
process
works
produce
result
standards
governing
decision
purposes
describing
counsel
duties
therefore
florida
capital
sentencing
proceeding
need
distinguished
ordinary
trial
iii
convicted
defendant
claim
counsel
assistance
defective
require
reversal
conviction
death
sentence
two
components
first
defendant
must
show
counsel
performance
deficient
requires
showing
counsel
made
errors
serious
counsel
functioning
counsel
guaranteed
defendant
sixth
amendment
second
defendant
must
show
deficient
performance
prejudiced
defense
requires
showing
counsel
errors
serious
deprive
defendant
fair
trial
trial
whose
result
reliable
unless
defendant
makes
showings
said
conviction
death
sentence
resulted
breakdown
adversary
process
renders
result
unreliable
federal
courts
appeals
held
proper
standard
attorney
performance
reasonably
effective
assistance
see
trapnell
indirectly
recognized
much
stated
mcmann
richardson
supra
guilty
plea
attacked
based
inadequate
legal
advice
unless
counsel
reasonably
competent
attorney
advice
within
range
competence
demanded
attorneys
criminal
cases
see
also
cuyler
sullivan
supra
convicted
defendant
complains
ineffectiveness
counsel
assistance
defendant
must
show
counsel
representation
fell
objective
standard
reasonableness
specific
guidelines
appropriate
sixth
amendment
refers
simply
counsel
specifying
particular
requirements
effective
assistance
relies
instead
legal
profession
maintenance
standards
sufficient
justify
law
presumption
counsel
fulfill
role
adversary
process
amendment
envisions
see
michel
louisiana
proper
measure
attorney
performance
remains
simply
reasonableness
prevailing
professional
norms
representation
criminal
defendant
entails
certain
basic
duties
counsel
function
assist
defendant
hence
counsel
owes
client
duty
loyalty
duty
avoid
conflicts
interest
see
cuyler
sullivan
supra
counsel
function
assistant
defendant
derive
overarching
duty
advocate
defendant
cause
particular
duties
consult
defendant
important
decisions
keep
defendant
informed
important
developments
course
prosecution
counsel
also
duty
bring
bear
skill
knowledge
render
trial
reliable
adversarial
testing
process
see
powell
alabama
basic
duties
neither
exhaustively
define
obligations
counsel
form
checklist
judicial
evaluation
attorney
performance
case
presenting
ineffectiveness
claim
performance
inquiry
must
whether
counsel
assistance
reasonable
considering
circumstances
prevailing
norms
practice
reflected
american
bar
association
standards
like
aba
standards
criminal
justice
ed
defense
function
guides
determining
reasonable
guides
particular
set
detailed
rules
counsel
conduct
satisfactorily
take
account
variety
circumstances
faced
defense
counsel
range
legitimate
decisions
regarding
best
represent
criminal
defendant
set
rules
interfere
constitutionally
protected
independence
counsel
restrict
wide
latitude
counsel
must
making
tactical
decisions
see
decoster
app
indeed
existence
detailed
guidelines
representation
distract
counsel
overriding
mission
vigorous
advocacy
defendant
cause
moreover
purpose
effective
assistance
guarantee
sixth
amendment
improve
quality
legal
representation
although
goal
considerable
importance
legal
system
purpose
simply
ensure
criminal
defendants
receive
fair
trial
judicial
scrutiny
counsel
performance
must
highly
deferential
tempting
defendant
counsel
assistance
conviction
adverse
sentence
easy
examining
counsel
defense
proved
unsuccessful
conclude
particular
act
omission
counsel
unreasonable
cf
engle
isaac
fair
assessment
attorney
performance
requires
every
effort
made
eliminate
distorting
effects
hindsight
reconstruct
circumstances
counsel
challenged
conduct
evaluate
conduct
counsel
perspective
time
difficulties
inherent
making
evaluation
must
indulge
strong
presumption
counsel
conduct
falls
within
wide
range
reasonable
professional
assistance
defendant
must
overcome
presumption
circumstances
challenged
action
might
considered
sound
trial
strategy
see
michel
louisiana
supra
countless
ways
provide
effective
assistance
given
case
even
best
criminal
defense
attorneys
defend
particular
client
way
see
goodpaster
trial
life
effective
assistance
counsel
death
penalty
cases
rev
availability
intrusive
inquiry
attorney
performance
detailed
guidelines
evaluation
encourage
proliferation
ineffectiveness
challenges
criminal
trials
resolved
unfavorably
defendant
increasingly
come
followed
second
trial
one
counsel
unsuccessful
defense
counsel
performance
even
willingness
serve
adversely
affected
intensive
scrutiny
counsel
rigid
requirements
acceptable
assistance
dampen
ardor
impair
independence
defense
counsel
discourage
acceptance
assigned
cases
undermine
trust
attorney
client
thus
deciding
actual
ineffectiveness
claim
must
judge
reasonableness
counsel
challenged
conduct
facts
particular
case
viewed
time
counsel
conduct
convicted
defendant
making
claim
ineffective
assistance
must
identify
acts
omissions
counsel
alleged
result
reasonable
professional
judgment
must
determine
whether
light
circumstances
identified
acts
omissions
outside
wide
range
professionally
competent
assistance
making
determination
keep
mind
counsel
function
elaborated
prevailing
professional
norms
make
adversarial
testing
process
work
particular
case
time
recognize
counsel
strongly
presumed
rendered
adequate
assistance
made
significant
decisions
exercise
reasonable
professional
judgment
standards
require
special
amplification
order
define
counsel
duty
investigate
duty
issue
case
appeals
concluded
strategic
choices
made
thorough
investigation
law
facts
relevant
plausible
options
virtually
unchallengeable
strategic
choices
made
less
complete
investigation
reasonable
precisely
extent
reasonable
professional
judgments
support
limitations
investigation
words
counsel
duty
make
reasonable
investigations
make
reasonable
decision
makes
particular
investigations
unnecessary
ineffectiveness
case
particular
decision
investigate
must
directly
assessed
reasonableness
circumstances
applying
heavy
measure
deference
counsel
judgments
reasonableness
counsel
actions
may
determined
substantially
influenced
defendant
statements
actions
counsel
actions
usually
based
quite
properly
informed
strategic
choices
made
defendant
information
supplied
defendant
particular
investigation
decisions
reasonable
depends
critically
information
example
facts
support
certain
potential
line
defense
generally
known
counsel
defendant
said
need
investigation
may
considerably
diminished
eliminated
altogether
defendant
given
counsel
reason
believe
pursuing
certain
investigations
fruitless
even
harmful
counsel
failure
pursue
investigations
may
later
challenged
unreasonable
short
inquiry
counsel
conversations
defendant
may
critical
proper
assessment
counsel
investigation
decisions
may
critical
proper
assessment
counsel
litigation
decisions
see
decoster
supra
error
counsel
even
professionally
unreasonable
warrant
setting
aside
judgment
criminal
proceeding
error
effect
judgment
cf
morrison
purpose
sixth
amendment
guarantee
counsel
ensure
defendant
assistance
necessary
justify
reliance
outcome
proceeding
accordingly
deficiencies
counsel
performance
must
prejudicial
defense
order
constitute
ineffective
assistance
constitution
certain
sixth
amendment
contexts
prejudice
presumed
actual
constructive
denial
assistance
counsel
altogether
legally
presumed
result
prejudice
various
kinds
state
interference
counsel
assistance
see
cronic
ante
prejudice
circumstances
likely
inquiry
prejudice
worth
cost
ante
moreover
circumstances
involve
impairments
sixth
amendment
right
easy
identify
reason
prosecution
directly
responsible
easy
government
prevent
one
type
actual
ineffectiveness
claim
warrants
similar
though
limited
presumption
prejudice
cuyler
sullivan
held
prejudice
presumed
counsel
burdened
actual
conflict
interest
circumstances
counsel
breaches
duty
loyalty
perhaps
basic
counsel
duties
moreover
difficult
measure
precise
effect
defense
representation
corrupted
conflicting
interests
given
obligation
counsel
avoid
conflicts
interest
ability
trial
courts
make
early
inquiry
certain
situations
likely
give
rise
conflicts
see
fed
rule
crim
proc
reasonable
criminal
justice
system
maintain
fairly
rigid
rule
presumed
prejudice
conflicts
interest
even
rule
quite
per
se
rule
prejudice
exists
sixth
amendment
claims
mentioned
prejudice
presumed
defendant
demonstrates
counsel
actively
represented
conflicting
interests
actual
conflict
interest
adversely
affected
lawyer
performance
cuyler
sullivan
supra
omitted
conflict
interest
claims
aside
actual
ineffectiveness
claims
alleging
deficiency
attorney
performance
subject
general
requirement
defendant
affirmatively
prove
prejudice
government
responsible
hence
able
prevent
attorney
errors
result
reversal
conviction
sentence
attorney
errors
come
infinite
variety
likely
utterly
harmless
particular
case
prejudicial
classified
according
likelihood
causing
prejudice
defined
sufficient
precision
inform
defense
attorneys
correctly
conduct
avoid
representation
art
act
omission
unprofessional
one
case
may
sound
even
brilliant
another
even
defendant
shows
particular
errors
counsel
unreasonable
therefore
defendant
must
show
actually
adverse
effect
defense
enough
defendant
show
errors
conceivable
effect
outcome
proceeding
virtually
every
act
omission
counsel
meet
test
cf
every
error
conceivably
influenced
outcome
undermines
reliability
result
proceeding
respondent
suggests
requiring
showing
errors
impaired
presentation
defense
brief
respondent
standard
however
provides
workable
principle
since
error
indeed
error
impairs
presentation
defense
proposed
standard
inadequate
provides
way
deciding
impairments
sufficiently
serious
warrant
setting
aside
outcome
proceeding
hand
believe
defendant
need
show
counsel
deficient
conduct
likely
altered
outcome
case
standard
several
strengths
defines
relevant
inquiry
way
familiar
courts
though
inquiry
inevitable
anything
precise
standard
also
reflects
profound
importance
finality
criminal
proceedings
moreover
comports
widely
used
standard
assessing
motions
new
trial
based
newly
discovered
evidence
see
brief
amicus
curiae
nn
nevertheless
standard
quite
appropriate
even
specified
attorney
error
results
omission
certain
evidence
newly
discovered
evidence
standard
apt
source
draw
prejudice
standard
ineffectiveness
claims
high
standard
newly
discovered
evidence
claims
presupposes
essential
elements
presumptively
accurate
fair
proceeding
present
proceeding
whose
result
challenged
cf
johnson
ineffective
assistance
claim
asserts
absence
one
crucial
assurances
result
proceeding
reliable
finality
concerns
somewhat
weaker
appropriate
standard
prejudice
somewhat
lower
result
proceeding
rendered
unreliable
hence
proceeding
unfair
even
errors
counsel
shown
preponderance
evidence
determined
outcome
accordingly
appropriate
test
prejudice
finds
roots
test
materiality
exculpatory
information
disclosed
defense
prosecution
agurs
test
materiality
testimony
made
unavailable
defense
government
deportation
witness
supra
defendant
must
show
reasonable
probability
counsel
unprofessional
errors
result
proceeding
different
reasonable
probability
probability
sufficient
undermine
confidence
outcome
making
determination
whether
specified
errors
resulted
required
prejudice
presume
absent
challenge
judgment
grounds
evidentiary
insufficiency
judge
jury
acted
according
law
assessment
likelihood
result
favorable
defendant
must
exclude
possibility
arbitrariness
whimsy
caprice
nullification
like
defendant
entitlement
luck
lawless
decisionmaker
even
lawless
decision
reviewed
assessment
prejudice
proceed
assumption
decisionmaker
reasonably
conscientiously
impartially
applying
standards
govern
decision
depend
idiosyncracies
particular
decisionmaker
unusual
propensities
toward
harshness
leniency
although
factors
may
actually
entered
counsel
selection
strategies
limited
extent
may
thus
affect
performance
inquiry
irrelevant
prejudice
inquiry
thus
evidence
actual
process
decision
part
record
proceeding
review
evidence
example
particular
judge
sentencing
practices
considered
prejudice
determination
governing
legal
standard
plays
critical
role
defining
question
asked
assessing
prejudice
counsel
errors
defendant
challenges
conviction
question
whether
reasonable
probability
absent
errors
factfinder
reasonable
doubt
respecting
guilt
defendant
challenges
death
sentence
one
issue
case
question
whether
reasonable
probability
absent
errors
sentencer
including
appellate
extent
independently
reweighs
evidence
concluded
balance
aggravating
mitigating
circumstances
warrant
death
making
determination
hearing
ineffectiveness
claim
must
consider
totality
evidence
judge
jury
factual
findings
unaffected
errors
factual
findings
affected
affected
different
ways
errors
pervasive
effect
inferences
drawn
evidence
altering
entire
evidentiary
picture
isolated
trivial
effect
moreover
verdict
conclusion
weakly
supported
record
likely
affected
errors
one
overwhelming
record
support
taking
unaffected
findings
given
taking
due
account
effect
errors
remaining
findings
making
prejudice
inquiry
must
ask
defendant
met
burden
showing
decision
reached
reasonably
likely
different
absent
errors
iv
number
practical
considerations
important
application
standards
outlined
important
adjudicating
claim
actual
ineffectiveness
counsel
keep
mind
principles
stated
establish
mechanical
rules
although
principles
guide
process
decision
ultimate
focus
inquiry
must
fundamental
fairness
proceeding
whose
result
challenged
every
case
concerned
whether
despite
strong
presumption
reliability
result
particular
proceeding
unreliable
breakdown
adversarial
process
system
counts
produce
results
extent
already
guiding
inquiry
lower
courts
standards
articulated
today
require
reconsideration
ineffectiveness
claims
rejected
different
standards
cf
trapnell
several
years
applying
farce
mockery
standard
along
reasonable
competence
standard
never
found
result
case
hinged
choice
particular
standard
particular
minor
differences
lower
courts
precise
formulations
performance
standard
insignificant
different
formulations
mere
variations
overarching
reasonableness
standard
regard
prejudice
inquiry
strict
test
among
standards
articulated
lower
courts
imposes
heavier
burden
defendants
tests
laid
today
difference
however
alter
merit
ineffectiveness
claim
rarest
case
although
discussed
performance
component
ineffectiveness
claim
prior
prejudice
component
reason
deciding
ineffective
assistance
claim
approach
inquiry
order
even
address
components
inquiry
defendant
makes
insufficient
showing
one
particular
need
determine
whether
counsel
performance
deficient
examining
prejudice
suffered
defendant
result
alleged
deficiencies
object
ineffectiveness
claim
grade
counsel
performance
easier
dispose
ineffectiveness
claim
ground
lack
sufficient
prejudice
expect
often
course
followed
courts
strive
ensure
ineffectiveness
claims
become
burdensome
defense
counsel
entire
criminal
justice
system
suffers
result
principles
governing
ineffectiveness
claims
apply
federal
collateral
proceedings
direct
appeal
motions
new
trial
indicated
cause
prejudice
test
overcoming
procedural
waivers
claims
error
presumption
criminal
judgment
final
strongest
collateral
attacks
judgment
see
frady
engle
isaac
ineffectiveness
claim
however
articulation
standards
govern
decision
claims
makes
clear
attack
fundamental
fairness
proceeding
whose
result
challenged
since
fundamental
fairness
central
concern
writ
habeas
corpus
see
special
standards
apply
ineffectiveness
claims
made
habeas
proceedings
finally
federal
habeas
challenge
state
criminal
judgment
state
conclusion
counsel
rendered
effective
assistance
finding
fact
binding
federal
extent
stated
ineffectiveness
question
basic
primary
historical
fac
townsend
sain
rather
like
question
whether
multiple
representation
particular
case
gave
rise
conflict
interest
mixed
question
law
fact
see
cuyler
sullivan
although
state
findings
fact
made
course
deciding
ineffectiveness
claim
subject
deference
requirement
although
district
findings
subject
clearly
erroneous
standard
federal
rule
civil
procedure
performance
prejudice
components
ineffectiveness
inquiry
mixed
questions
law
fact
articulated
general
standards
judging
ineffectiveness
claims
think
useful
apply
standards
facts
case
order
illustrate
meaning
general
principles
record
makes
possible
conflicts
state
federal
courts
findings
fact
principles
articulated
sufficiently
close
principles
applied
florida
courts
district
clear
factfinding
affected
erroneous
legal
principles
see
swint
application
governing
principles
difficult
case
facts
described
see
supra
make
clear
conduct
respondent
counsel
respondent
sentencing
proceeding
found
unreasonable
also
make
clear
even
assuming
challenged
conduct
counsel
unreasonable
respondent
suffered
insufficient
prejudice
warrant
setting
aside
death
sentence
respect
performance
component
record
shows
respondent
counsel
made
strategic
choice
argue
extreme
emotional
distress
mitigating
circumstance
rely
fully
possible
respondent
acceptance
responsibility
crimes
although
counsel
understandably
felt
hopeless
respondent
prospects
see
app
nothing
record
indicates
one
possible
reading
district
opinion
suggests
see
app
pet
cert
counsel
sense
hopelessness
distorted
professional
judgment
counsel
strategy
choice
well
within
range
professionally
reasonable
judgments
decision
seek
character
psychological
evidence
already
hand
likewise
reasonable
trial
judge
views
importance
owning
one
crimes
well
known
counsel
aggravating
circumstances
utterly
overwhelming
trial
counsel
reasonably
surmise
conversations
respondent
character
psychological
evidence
little
help
respondent
already
able
mention
plea
colloquy
substance
know
financial
emotional
troubles
restricting
testimony
respondent
character
come
plea
colloquy
ensured
contrary
character
psychological
evidence
respondent
criminal
history
counsel
successfully
moved
exclude
come
facts
little
question
even
without
application
presumption
adequate
performance
trial
counsel
defense
though
unsuccessful
result
reasonable
professional
judgment
respect
prejudice
component
lack
merit
respondent
claim
even
stark
evidence
respondent
says
trial
counsel
offered
sentencing
hearing
barely
altered
sentencing
profile
presented
sentencing
judge
state
courts
district
found
evidence
shows
numerous
people
knew
respondent
thought
generally
good
person
psychiatrist
psychologist
believed
considerable
emotional
stress
rise
level
extreme
disturbance
given
overwhelming
aggravating
factors
reasonable
probability
omitted
evidence
changed
conclusion
aggravating
circumstances
outweighed
mitigating
circumstances
hence
sentence
imposed
indeed
admission
evidence
respondent
offers
might
even
harmful
case
rap
sheet
probably
admitted
evidence
psychological
reports
directly
contradicted
respondent
claim
mitigating
circumstance
extreme
emotional
disturbance
applied
case
conclusions
prejudice
performance
components
ineffectiveness
inquiry
depend
trial
judge
testimony
district
hearing
therefore
need
consider
general
admissibility
testimony
although
noted
supra
testimony
irrelevant
prejudice
inquiry
moreover
prejudice
question
resolvable
hence
ineffectiveness
claim
rejected
without
regard
evidence
presented
district
hearing
state
courts
properly
concluded
ineffectiveness
claim
meritless
without
holding
evidentiary
hearing
failure
make
required
showing
either
deficient
performance
sufficient
prejudice
defeats
ineffectiveness
claim
double
failure
generally
respondent
made
showing
justice
sentence
rendered
unreliable
breakdown
adversary
process
caused
deficiencies
counsel
assistance
respondent
sentencing
proceeding
fundamentally
unfair
conclude
therefore
district
properly
declined
issue
writ
habeas
corpus
judgment
appeals
accordingly
reversed
join
opinion
dissent
judgment
adhering
view
death
penalty
circumstances
cruel
unusual
punishment
forbidden
eighth
fourteenth
amendments
see
gregg
georgia
brennan
dissenting
vacate
respondent
death
sentence
remand
case
proceedings
case
cronic
ante
present
first
occasions
elaborate
appropriate
standards
judging
claims
ineffective
assistance
counsel
cronic
considers
claims
context
cases
surrounding
circumstances
make
unlikely
lawyer
provide
effective
assistance
ineffectiveness
properly
presumed
without
inquiry
actual
performance
trial
ante
case
contrast
concerns
claims
ineffective
assistance
based
allegations
specific
errors
counsel
claims
nature
require
courts
evaluate
attorney
performance
effect
performance
reliability
fairness
proceeding
accordingly
defendant
making
claim
kind
must
show
lawyer
performance
inadequate
also
prejudiced
thereby
see
also
cronic
ante
join
opinion
believe
standards
sets
today
provide
helpful
guidance
courts
considering
claims
actual
ineffectiveness
counsel
also
permit
courts
continue
efforts
achieve
progressive
development
area
law
like
federal
courts
state
courts
previously
addressed
matter
see
ante
concludes
proper
standard
attorney
performance
reasonably
effective
assistance
ante
rejecting
strict
test
employed
courts
adopts
appropriate
standard
prejudice
requirement
defendant
show
reasonable
probability
counsel
unprofessional
errors
result
proceeding
different
defining
reasonable
probability
probability
sufficient
undermine
confidence
outcome
ante
believe
standards
sufficiently
precise
permit
meaningful
distinctions
attorney
derelictions
deprive
defendants
constitutional
rights
time
standards
sufficiently
flexible
accommodate
wide
variety
situations
giving
rise
claims
kind
respect
performance
standard
agree
conclusion
particular
set
detailed
rules
counsel
conduct
inappropriate
ante
precisely
standard
reasonably
effective
assistance
adopted
today
requires
counsel
performance
measured
light
particular
circumstances
case
believe
decision
stunt
development
constitutional
doctrine
area
post
marshall
dissenting
indeed
suggestion
today
decision
largely
consistent
approach
taken
lower
courts
ante
simply
indicates
courts
may
continue
develop
governing
principles
basis
tradition
past
similarly
prejudice
standard
announced
today
erect
insurmountable
obstacle
meritorious
claims
rather
simply
requires
courts
carefully
examine
trial
records
light
nature
seriousness
counsel
errors
effect
particular
circumstances
case
ante
ii
flexibility
requirement
considered
light
particular
circumstances
case
standards
announced
today
applied
concern
special
considerations
must
attend
review
counsel
performance
capital
sentencing
proceeding
contrast
case
finding
ineffective
assistance
requires
new
trial
conclusion
counsel
ineffective
respect
penalty
phase
capital
trial
imposes
state
far
lesser
burden
reconsideration
sentence
alone
hand
consequences
defendant
incompetent
assistance
capital
sentencing
course
greater
recognizing
unique
seriousness
proceeding
repeatedly
emphasized
discretion
afforded
sentencing
body
matter
grave
determination
whether
human
life
taken
spared
discretion
must
suitably
directed
limited
minimize
risk
wholly
arbitrary
capricious
action
zant
stephens
quoting
gregg
georgia
opinion
stewart
powell
stevens
reason
consistently
required
capital
proceedings
policed
stages
especially
vigilant
concern
procedural
fairness
accuracy
factfinding
justice
marshall
emphasized
last
term
always
insisted
need
procedural
safeguards
particularly
great
life
stake
long
established
right
counsel
felony
cases
gideon
wainwright
recognized
right
capital
cases
powell
alabama
time
condemned
procedures
capital
cases
might
completely
acceptable
ordinary
case
see
bullington
missouri
beck
alabama
green
georgia
per
curiam
lockett
ohio
gardner
florida
woodson
north
carolina
th
basic
difference
death
penalty
punishments
consistently
recognized
corresponding
difference
need
reliability
determination
death
appropriate
punishment
specific
case
ibid
barefoot
estelle
dissenting
opinion
sentencing
phase
capital
case
hat
essential
jury
possible
relevant
information
individual
defendant
whose
fate
must
determine
jurek
texas
opinion
stewart
powell
stevens
reason
repeatedly
insisted
sentencer
capital
cases
must
permitted
consider
relevant
mitigating
factor
eddings
oklahoma
fact
justice
noted
sentencing
judge
failure
consider
relevant
aspects
defendant
character
background
creates
unacceptable
risk
death
penalty
unconstitutionally
imposed
even
cases
matter
raised
interests
justice
may
impose
reviewing
courts
duty
remand
case
resentencing
concurring
course
right
present
sentencer
consider
mitigating
evidence
means
little
defense
counsel
fails
look
mitigating
evidence
fails
present
case
mitigation
capital
sentencing
hearing
comment
colum
rev
see
burger
zant
defendant
years
old
time
crime
sentenced
death
counsel
failed
present
evidence
mitigation
stay
granted
post
accordingly
counsel
general
duty
investigate
ante
takes
importance
defendant
context
developing
mitigating
evidence
present
judge
jury
considering
sentence
death
claims
ineffective
assistance
performance
duty
therefore
considered
commensurate
care
rejects
claim
case
course
understood
reflect
diminution
commitment
principle
fundamental
respect
humanity
underlying
eighth
amendment
requires
consideration
character
record
individual
offender
circumstances
particular
offense
constitutionally
indispensable
part
process
inflicting
penalty
death
eddings
oklahoma
supra
quoting
woodson
north
carolina
opinion
stewart
powell
stevens
satisfied
standards
announced
today
go
far
towards
assisting
lower
federal
courts
state
courts
discharging
constitutional
duty
ensure
every
criminal
defendant
receives
effective
assistance
counsel
guaranteed
sixth
amendment
footnotes
indeed
counsel
incompetence
serious
rises
level
constructive
denial
counsel
constitute
constitutional
error
without
showing
prejudice
see
cronic
ante
javor
prejudice
inherent
case
unconscious
sleeping
counsel
equivalent
counsel
justice
marshall
dissenting
sixth
fourteenth
amendments
guarantee
person
accused
crime
right
aid
lawyer
preparing
presenting
defense
long
settled
right
counsel
right
effective
assistance
counsel
mcmann
richardson
state
lower
federal
courts
developed
standards
distinguishing
effective
inadequate
assistance
today
first
time
attempts
synthesize
clarify
standards
part
majority
efforts
unhelpful
neither
two
principal
holdings
seems
likely
improve
adjudication
sixth
amendment
claims
zeal
survey
comprehensively
field
doctrine
majority
makes
many
generalizations
suggestions
find
unacceptable
importantly
majority
fails
take
adequate
account
fact
locus
case
capital
sentencing
proceeding
accordingly
join
neither
opinion
judgment
opinion
revolves
around
two
holdings
first
majority
ties
constitutional
minima
attorney
performance
simple
standard
reasonableness
ante
second
majority
holds
error
counsel
sufficient
impact
trial
undermine
confidence
outcome
grounds
overturning
conviction
ante
disagree
rulings
objection
performance
standard
adopted
malleable
practice
either
grip
yield
excessive
variation
manner
sixth
amendment
interpreted
applied
different
courts
tell
lawyers
lower
courts
counsel
criminal
defendant
must
behave
reasonably
must
act
like
reasonably
competent
attorney
ante
tell
almost
nothing
essence
majority
instructed
judges
called
upon
assess
claims
ineffective
assistance
counsel
advert
intuitions
regarding
constitutes
professional
representation
discouraged
trying
develop
detailed
standards
governing
performance
defense
counsel
view
thereby
abdicated
responsiblity
interpret
constitution
also
impaired
ability
lower
courts
exercise
debilitating
ambiguity
objective
standard
reasonableness
context
illustrated
majority
failure
address
important
issues
concerning
quality
representation
mandated
constitution
unfortunate
undeniable
fact
person
means
selecting
lawyer
paying
enough
ensure
prepares
thoroughly
usually
obtain
better
representation
available
indigent
defendant
must
rely
appointed
counsel
turn
limited
time
resources
devote
given
case
reasonably
competent
attorney
reasonably
competent
adequately
paid
retained
lawyer
reasonably
competent
appointed
attorney
also
fact
quality
representation
available
ordinary
defendants
different
parts
country
varies
significantly
standard
performance
mandated
sixth
amendment
vary
locale
majority
offers
clues
proper
responses
questions
majority
defends
refusal
adopt
specific
standards
primarily
ground
particular
set
detailed
rules
counsel
conduct
satisfactorily
take
account
variety
circumstances
faced
defense
counsel
range
legitimate
decisions
regarding
best
represent
criminal
defendant
ante
agree
counsel
must
afforded
wide
latitude
making
tactical
decisions
regarding
trial
strategy
see
ante
cf
infra
many
aspects
job
criminal
defense
attorney
amenable
judicial
oversight
example
much
work
involved
preparing
trial
applying
bail
conferring
one
client
making
timely
objections
significant
arguably
erroneous
rulings
trial
judge
filing
notice
appeal
colorable
grounds
therefor
profitably
made
subject
uniform
standards
opinion
appeals
case
represents
one
sound
attempt
develop
particularized
standards
designed
ensure
defendants
receive
effective
legal
assistance
see
en
banc
generally
consistent
efforts
see
decoster
app
disapproved
rehearing
app
en
banc
cert
denied
coles
peyton
cert
denied
people
pope
cal
state
harper
refusing
address
merits
proposals
indeed
suggesting
effort
worthwhile
opinion
fear
stunt
development
constitutional
doctrine
area
object
prejudice
standard
adopted
two
independent
reasons
first
often
difficult
tell
whether
defendant
convicted
trial
ineffectively
represented
fared
better
lawyer
competent
seemingly
impregnable
cases
sometimes
dismantled
good
defense
counsel
basis
cold
record
may
impossible
reviewing
confidently
ascertain
government
evidence
arguments
stood
rebuttal
shrewd
lawyer
difficulties
estimating
prejudice
fact
exacerbated
possibility
evidence
injury
defendant
may
missing
record
precisely
incompetence
defense
counsel
view
impediments
fair
evaluation
probability
outcome
trial
affected
ineffectiveness
counsel
seems
senseless
impose
defendant
whose
lawyer
shown
incompetent
burden
demonstrating
prejudice
second
fundamentally
assumption
holding
rests
purpose
constitutional
guarantee
effective
assistance
counsel
reduce
chance
innocent
persons
convicted
view
guarantee
also
functions
ensure
convictions
obtained
fundamentally
fair
procedures
majority
contends
sixth
amendment
violated
manifestly
guilty
defendant
convicted
trial
represented
manifestly
ineffective
attorney
agree
every
defendant
entitled
trial
interests
vigorously
conscientiously
advocated
able
lawyer
proceeding
defendant
receive
meaningful
assistance
meeting
forces
state
opinion
constitute
due
process
chapman
california
acknowledged
certain
constitutional
rights
basic
fair
trial
infraction
never
treated
harmless
error
among
rights
right
assistance
counsel
trial
see
gideon
wainwright
view
right
effective
assistance
counsel
entailed
right
counsel
abridgment
former
equivalent
abridgment
latter
thus
hold
showing
performance
defendant
lawyer
departed
constitutionally
prescribed
standards
requires
new
trial
regardless
whether
defendant
suffered
demonstrable
prejudice
thereby
ii
even
inclined
join
majority
two
central
holdings
abide
manner
majority
elaborates
upon
rulings
particularly
regrettable
majority
discussion
presumption
reasonableness
accorded
lawyers
decisions
attempt
prejudge
merits
claims
previously
rejected
lower
courts
using
different
legal
standards
defining
standard
attorney
performance
required
constitution
majority
appropriately
notes
many
problems
confronting
criminal
defense
attorneys
admit
range
legitimate
responses
ante
majority
properly
cautions
courts
reviewing
lawyer
selection
amongst
set
options
avoid
hubris
hindsight
ibid
majority
goes
however
suggest
reviewing
courts
indulge
strong
presumption
counsel
conduct
constitutionally
acceptable
ibid
see
ante
appl
heavy
measure
deference
counsel
judgments
ante
sure
phrases
mean
doubt
lower
courts
denote
nothing
defendant
claiming
denied
effective
assistance
counsel
burden
proof
agree
see
cronic
ante
adjectives
strong
heavy
might
read
imposing
upon
defendants
unusually
weighty
burden
persuasion
majority
intent
must
respectfully
dissent
range
acceptable
behavior
defined
prevailing
professional
norms
ante
seems
sufficiently
broad
allow
defense
counsel
flexibility
need
responding
novel
problems
trial
strategy
afford
attorneys
latitude
strongly
presuming
behavior
fall
within
zone
reasonableness
covertly
legitimate
convictions
sentences
obtained
basis
incompetent
conduct
defense
counsel
justification
majority
provides
proposed
presumption
undue
receptivity
claims
ineffective
assistance
counsel
encourage
many
defendants
raise
claims
thereby
clog
courts
frivolous
suits
dampen
ardor
defense
counsel
see
ante
confidence
majority
ability
state
federal
courts
expeditiously
dispose
meritless
arguments
ensure
responsible
innovative
lawyering
inhibited
view
little
gained
much
may
lost
instructing
lower
courts
proceed
assumption
defendant
challenge
lawyer
performance
insubstantial
many
years
lower
courts
debating
meaning
effective
assistance
counsel
different
courts
developed
different
standards
issue
level
performance
required
constitution
courts
adopted
forgiving
standard
others
adopted
various
versions
reasonable
competence
standard
issue
level
prejudice
necessary
compel
new
trial
courts
taken
wide
variety
positions
ranging
stringent
test
rule
showing
incompetence
part
defense
counsel
automatically
requires
reversal
conviction
regardless
injury
defendant
today
substantially
resolves
disputes
majority
holds
constitution
violated
defense
counsel
representation
falls
level
expected
reasonably
competent
defense
counsel
ante
affects
trial
reasonable
probability
absent
counsel
error
outcome
different
ante
curiously
though
discounts
significance
rulings
suggesting
choice
standards
matters
little
cases
decided
differently
lower
courts
always
applied
tests
announced
today
see
ante
surely
judges
state
lower
federal
courts
surprised
learn
distinctions
fiercely
debated
many
years
fact
unimportant
majority
comments
point
seem
prompted
principally
reluctance
acknowledge
today
decision
require
reassessment
many
previously
rejected
claims
majority
unhappiness
score
understandable
efforts
mitigate
perceived
problem
ineffectual
nothing
majority
says
relieve
lower
courts
hitherto
using
standards
tolerant
ineffectual
advocacy
obligation
scrutinize
claims
old
well
new
principles
laid
today
iii
majority
suggests
purposes
describing
counsel
duties
capital
sentencing
proceeding
need
distinguished
ordinary
trial
ante
agree
repeatedly
acknowledged
constitution
requires
stricter
adherence
procedural
safeguards
capital
case
cases
penalty
death
qualitatively
different
sentence
imprisonment
however
long
death
finality
differs
life
imprisonment
prison
term
differs
one
year
two
qualitative
difference
corresponding
difference
need
reliability
determination
death
appropriate
punishment
specific
case
woodson
north
carolina
plurality
opinion
omitted
matters
little
whether
strict
scrutiny
claim
ineffectiveness
counsel
resulted
death
sentence
achieved
modification
sixth
amendment
standards
especially
careful
application
standards
justice
brennan
suggests
necessary
adjustment
level
performance
required
counsel
capital
sentencing
proceedings
effected
simply
construing
phrase
reasonableness
prevailing
professional
norms
manner
takes
account
nature
impending
penalty
ante
though
prefer
specific
iteration
counsel
duties
special
context
accept
proposal
however
instructing
lower
courts
regarding
probability
impact
upon
outcome
requires
resentencing
think
best
explicitly
modify
legal
standard
view
person
death
row
whose
counsel
performance
fell
constitutionally
acceptable
levels
compelled
demonstrate
reasonable
probability
given
life
sentence
lawyer
competent
see
ante
defendant
establish
significant
chance
outcome
different
surely
entitled
redetermination
fate
cf
agurs
marshall
dissenting
iv
views
expressed
preceding
section
oblige
dissent
majority
disposition
case
us
undisputed
respondent
trial
counsel
made
virtually
investigation
possibility
obtaining
testimony
respondent
relatives
friends
former
employers
pertaining
respondent
character
background
counsel
done
found
several
persons
willing
able
testify
experience
respondent
responsible
nonviolent
man
devoted
family
active
affairs
church
see
app
respondent
contends
lawyer
used
testimony
humanize
respondent
counteract
impression
conveyed
trial
little
killer
evidence
admitted
respondent
argues
chances
obtaining
life
sentence
significantly
better
measured
standards
outlined
respondent
contentions
substantial
experienced
members
bar
long
recognized
crucial
importance
adducing
evidence
sentencing
proceeding
establishes
defendant
social
familial
connections
see
goodpaster
trial
life
effective
assistance
counsel
death
penalty
cases
rev
state
makes
colorable
though
view
compelling
argument
defense
counsel
case
might
made
reasonable
strategic
decision
present
evidence
sentencing
hearing
assumption
unadorned
acknowledgment
respondent
responsibility
crimes
likely
appeal
trial
judge
reputed
respect
persons
accepted
responsibility
actions
however
justifiable
choice
might
counsel
fairly
assessed
potential
strength
mitigating
evidence
available
counsel
failure
make
significant
effort
find
evidence
might
garnered
respondent
relatives
acquaintances
surely
described
reasonable
counsel
failure
investigate
particularly
suspicious
light
candid
admission
respondent
confessions
conduct
course
trial
gave
feeling
hopelessness
regarding
possibility
saving
respondent
life
see
app
aggravating
circumstances
implicated
respondent
criminal
conduct
substantial
see
ante
vitiate
respondent
constitutional
claim
judges
juries
cases
involving
behavior
least
egregious
shown
mercy
particularly
afforded
opportunity
see
facets
defendant
personality
life
respondent
contention
defeated
possibility
material
counsel
turned
might
sufficient
establish
statutory
mitigating
circumstance
florida
law
florida
sentencing
judges
florida
sometimes
refuse
impose
death
sentences
cases
even
though
statutory
mitigating
circumstances
outweigh
statutory
aggravating
circumstances
addition
nonstatutory
mitigating
circumstances
tips
scales
favor
life
imprisonment
barclay
florida
stevens
concurring
judgment
emphasis
original
counsel
investigated
availability
mitigating
evidence
might
well
decided
present
material
hearing
done
significant
chance
respondent
given
life
sentence
view
possibilities
conjoined
unreasonableness
counsel
failure
investigate
sufficient
establish
violation
sixth
amendment
entitle
respondent
new
sentencing
proceeding
respectfully
dissent
see
note
identifying
remedying
ineffective
assistance
criminal
defense
counsel
new
look
decoster
harv
rev
note
effective
assistance
counsel
sixth
amendment
fair
trial
guarantee
chi
rev
moore
defining
constitutionally
required
level
performance
exercise
customary
skill
knowledge
normally
prevails
time
place
review
decisions
attempting
develop
guidelines
assessment
claims
see
erickson
standards
competency
defense
counsel
criminal
case
crim
rev
many
decisions
rely
heavily
standards
developed
american
bar
association
see
aba
standards
criminal
justice
ed
cf
ellison
discussing
related
problem
measuring
injury
caused
joint
representation
conflicting
interests
observed
evil
advocate
finds
compelled
refrain
trial
also
possible
pretrial
plea
negotiations
sentencing
process
may
possible
cases
identify
record
prejudice
resulting
attorney
failure
undertake
certain
trial
tasks
even
record
sentencing
hearing
available
difficult
judge
intelligently
impact
conflict
attorney
representation
client
assess
impact
conflict
interests
attorney
options
tactics
decisions
plea
negotiations
virtually
impossible
thus
inquiry
claim
harmless
error
require
unlike
cases
unguided
speculation
holloway
arkansas
emphasis
original
see
decoster
app
en
banc
bazelon
dissenting
cert
denied
note
harv
cases
government
acted
way
prevented
defense
counsel
functioning
effectively
refused
require
defendant
order
obtain
new
trial
demonstrate
injured
glasser
example
held
determine
precise
degree
prejudice
sustained
defendant
result
appointment
counsel
two
codefendants
conflicting
interests
difficult
unnecessary
right
assistance
counsel
fundamental
absolute
allow
courts
indulge
nice
calculations
amount
prejudice
arising
denial
see
yelardy
cert
denied
beasley
commonwealth
badger
see
state
pacheco
hoover
state
ark
line
state
ind
see
trapnell
cooper
fitzharris
en
banc
cert
denied
see
decoster
app
plurality
opinion
knight
state
see
supra
see
also
zant
stephens
eddings
oklahoma
lockett
ohio
plurality
opinion
see
goodpaster
trial
life
effective
assistance
counsel
death
penalty
cases
rev
justice
brennan
points
ante
additional
reason
examining
especially
carefully
sixth
amendment
challenge
pertains
capital
sentencing
proceeding
result
finding
constitutional
violation
context
less
disruptive
finding
counsel
incompetent
liability
phase
trial
see
part
supra
sensible
effort
formulate
guidelines
conduct
defense
counsel
capital
sentencing
proceedings
see
goodpaster
supra
purposes
succeeding
section
assume
solely
sake
argument
showing
prejudice
necessary
state
violation
sixth
amendment
cf
part
supra
read
opinion
preclude
kind
adjustment
legal
standard
majority
defines
reasonable
probability
probability
sufficient
undermine
confidence
outcome
ante
view
nature
sanction
issue
difficulty
determining
sentencer
responded
presented
different
set
facts
argued
lower
estimate
likelihood
outcome
capital
sentencing
proceeding
influenced
attorney
error
sufficient
undermine
confidence
outcome
true
ordinary
criminal
case
adhering
view
death
penalty
unconstitutional
circumstances
gregg
georgia
marshall
dissenting
vote
vacate
respondent
sentence
even
presented
substantial
sixth
amendment
claim
two
considerations
undercut
state
explanation
counsel
decision
first
apparent
adducement
evidence
pertaining
respondent
character
familial
connections
inconsistent
respondent
acknowledgment
responsible
behavior
second
florida
possesses
frequently
exercises
power
overturn
death
sentences
deems
unwarranted
facts
case
see
state
dixon
even
counsel
decision
try
humanize
respondent
benefit
trial
judge
deemed
reasonable
counsel
failure
create
record
benefit
state
might
well
deemed
unreasonable
see
farmer
kinard
trial
penalty
phase
reprinted
california
state
public
defender
california
death
penalty
manual