Skip to main content, skip to search, or skip to the top of the page.

The Kelley Institute
Law of Lawyering
Supreme Court Review

Cases tagged as: prejudice

Berghuis v. Thompkins

130 S. Ct. 2250 (2010) (PDF)

Petitioner brought a Sixth Amendment ineffective assistance of counsel claim for failure to ask for jury instructions. The court held that even if there was deficient performance, the petitioner could not show prejudice under de novo review.

Related tag(s): 2009 Term, attorney-client relationship, ineffective assistance of counsel, prejudice, sixth amendment,

Bobby v. Van Hook

130 S.Ct. 13 (2009) (PDF)

State inmate (who had been sentenced to death) was held not to be entitled to federal habeas corpus relief on claim, under Federal Constitution's Sixth Amendment, of ineffective assistance of counsel during sentencing phase of trial. A decision not to seek more mitigating evidence was within the range of professionally reasonable judgments. Because the petition was filed before 1996 the stricter ABA standards for counsel in death penalty cases did not apply in assessing counsel's use of mitigation in sentencing portion of the trial.

Related tag(s): 2009 Term, attorney-client relationship, ineffective assistance of counsel, prejudice, sixth amendment,

Cullen v. Pinholster

131 S. Ct. 1388 (2011) (PDF)

The Court determined that counsel was not ineffective in failing to consult with an additional psychiatrist and more family members to produce sufficient mitigating evidence

Related tag(s): 2010 Term, attorney-client relationship, ineffective assistance of counsel, prejudice, sixth amendment,

Harrington v. Richter

131 S. Ct. 770 (2011) (PDF)

The Court reversed the Ninth Circuit's finding of ineffective assistance of counsel, where the defense attorney used cross-examination and other methods to create reasonable doubt rather than expert testimony and forensic evidence about the blood that was found at the murder scene.

Related tag(s): 2010 Term, academic amicus brief filed, attorney-client relationship, decision in favor of academic amicus brief, ineffective assistance of counsel, prejudice, sixth amendment,

Martel v. Clair

132 S.Ct. 1276 (2012) (PDF)

At issue here was whether a state death row prisoner is entitled to a new court-appointed lawyer when the first fails to pursue critical evidence (here exonerating DNA tests). The Court held that when evaluating motions to substitute counsel in capital cases under 18. U.S.C §3599, courts should employ the same “interests of justice” standard that applies in non-capital cases under §3006A. Regarding the District Court's denial of Clair's second request for new counsel, there was no abuse of discretion.

Related tag(s): 2011 Term, attorney-client relationship, ineffective assistance of counsel, prejudice, sixth amendment,

Martinez v. Ryan

132 S.Ct. 1309 (2012) (PDF)

In Martinez, the Court decided whether a criminal defendant had a right to effective assistance of first post-conviction counsel, specifically with respect to his ineffective-assistance-of-trial-counsel claim. They held that where, under state law, ineffective-assistance-of-trial-counsel claims must be raised in an initial-review collateral proceeding, a procedural default will not bar a federal habeas court from hearing those claims if, in the initial review collateral proceeding, there as no counsel or counsel in that proceeding was ineffective.

Related tag(s): 2011 Term, ABA amicus brief filed, attorney-client relationship, decision in favor of ABA amicus brief, ineffective assistance of counsel, prejudice, sixth amendment,

Porter v. McCollum

130 S. Ct. 447 (2009) (PDF)

Counsel's failure at a capital sentencing to present evidence of accused's mental health or mental impairment, family background, or military service held to be (1) ineffective assistance in violation of Sixth Amendment; and (2) prejudicial to accused.

Related tag(s): 2009 Term, attorney-client relationship, ineffective assistance of counsel, prejudice, sixth amendment,

Premo v. Moore

131 S. Ct. 733 (2011) (PDF)

State prisoner--who, after confessing to fatal shooting, followed counsel's advice to plead no contest to felony murder in exchange for minimum sentence--was held to be not entitled to federal habeas corpus relief on claim of ineffective assistance in counsel's failure, before giving plea advice, to move to suppress confession.

Related tag(s): 2010 Term, attorney-client relationship, ineffective assistance of counsel, prejudice, sixth amendment,

Wong v. Belmontes

130 S. Ct. 383 (2009) (PDF)

State prison inmate who had been sentenced to death for murder held not entitled to federal habeas corpus relief on claim, under Federal Constitution, of ineffective assistance of counsel during sentencing phase of trial as inmate could not establish prejudice under Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984).

Related tag(s): 2009 Term, attorney-client relationship, ineffective assistance of counsel, prejudice, sixth amendment,


Skip to main content, skip to search, or skip to the top of the page.