Effective Assistance of Counsel
What does "Effective Assistance of Counsel" mean in law?
The Sixth Amendment right to counsel encompasses the right to effective assistance, and under the two-prong test established in Strickland v. Washington (1984), a defendant claiming ineffective assistance must show: (1) deficient performance -- that counsel's representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness, and (2) prejudice -- that there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different. Courts apply a strong presumption that counsel's conduct falls within the wide range of reasonable professional assistance. In plea bargaining contexts, Lafler v. Cooper (2012) and Missouri v. Frye (2012) extended the Strickland framework, holding that the right to effective counsel applies during plea negotiations and that counsel's failure to communicate or properly advise on a plea offer can constitute deficient performance.
Definition
The Sixth Amendment right to counsel encompasses the right to effective assistance, and under the two-prong test established in Strickland v. Washington (1984), a defendant claiming ineffective assistance must show: (1) deficient performance -- that counsel's representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness, and (2) prejudice -- that there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different. Courts apply a strong presumption that counsel's conduct falls within the wide range of reasonable professional assistance. In plea bargaining contexts, Lafler v. Cooper (2012) and Missouri v. Frye (2012) extended the Strickland framework, holding that the right to effective counsel applies during plea negotiations and that counsel's failure to communicate or properly advise on a plea offer can constitute deficient performance.
Example
A convicted defendant sought habeas relief arguing that his trial attorney failed to investigate an alibi witness and slept during critical testimony, and the court found ineffective assistance because the errors were objectively unreasonable and there was a reasonable probability the jury would have acquitted had counsel performed competently.