 | This article needs additional citations for verification. (April 2012) |
| Strickland v. Washington | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued January 10, 1984 Decided May 14, 1984 | |
| Full case name | Strickland, Superintendent, Florida State Prison, v. Washington |
| Citations | 466 U.S. 668 (more) 104 S. Ct. 2052; 80 L. Ed. 2d 674 |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Writ of habeas corpus denied by the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida; reversed by the Eleventh Circuit, 693 F.2d 1243 (11th Cir. 1982); cert. granted, 462 U.S. 1105 (1983). |
| Holding | |
| To obtain relief because of ineffective assistance of counsel, a criminal defendant must show both that counsel's performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness and that counsel's deficient performance gives rise to a reasonable probability that if counsel had performed adequately, the result of the proceeding would have been different. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | O'Connor, joined by Burger, White, Blackmun, Powell, Rehnquist, Stevens |
| Concur/dissent | Brennan |
| Dissent | Marshall |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. amend. VI | |
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.
The decision was a compromise by the majority in which the varying "tests for ineffective performance of counsel" among the federal circuits and state supreme courts were forced into a singular middle ground test. State governments are free to create a test even more favorable to an appellant.