Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
No. 82-1554. Argued January 10, 1984. Decided May 14, 1984. 466 U.S. 668. Syllabus. Respondent pleaded guilty in a Florida trial court to an indictment that included three capital murder charges.
After exhausting his state court remedies, Mr. Washington sought habeas corpus relief in a Florida federal district court. He argued that his Sixth Amendment right was violated because he had ineffective assistance of counsel at sentencing. The district court denied the petition.
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984), was a landmark Supreme Court case that established the standard for determining when a criminal defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel is violated by that counsel's inadequate performance.
Case Summary of Strickland v. Washington: Defendant Washington was arrested for a number of crimes he committed in a 10-day crime spree. He ultimately pleaded guilty. At sentencing, the defendant’s attorney did not obtain character witnesses or order a pre-sentence report.
Respondent, Strickland, during a ten-day period, committed three groups of crimes, including three brutal capital murders, torture, kidnapping and attempted murders. Respondent pled guilty to all crimes and, stated that he accepted responsibility for the crimes and had only acted under extreme mental stress resulting from his inability to care ...
Respondent Strickland, a prisoner on death row challenging his conviction and sentence, argues that he would not have been sentenced to death but for his court-appointed attorney’s poor trial strategy.
The 1984 landmark case of Strickland v. Washington established a 2-part test to determine whether a criminal defendant’s attorney has failed to meet the minimum expectations for effective counsel in criminal proceedings guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment.