Post-Conviction Petitions

After a person has been convicted of a crime, the next steps may be generally categorized into two steps: direct appeal and postconviction remedies. Direct appeal is where an appeals court reviews what was done at the trial court level. Appeal issues include rulings on objections, the admissibility of evidence, and many other issues.

Arguably, the most common postconviction issue is ineffective assistance of trial counsel. By now, it is common knowledge that criminal defendants have the right to the assistance of counsel. This right is secured by the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. [1] But what good would the right to counsel be without some sort of safeguards or standards on counsel’s actual assistance? Having “a person who happens to be a lawyer is present at trial alongside the accused, however, is not enough to satisfy the constitutional command.” [2] Instead, “the right to counsel is the right to the effective assistance of counsel.” [3]

Establishing a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel requires the petitioner to satisfy two prongs: (1) deficient performance, and (2) resulting prejudice. [4] Deficient performance is satisfied when counsel’s representation falls below an objective standard of reasonableness as guided by prevailing professional norms. [5] Notably, the standard of what qualifies as reasonable assistance is broad and considers the totality of the circumstances involved in representation. [6]

Prejudice is demonstrated when there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different. [7] Generally, the prejudice inquiry is focused on the outcome and how it would have been different “but for” counsel’s ineffective assistance.

Where the outcome underlying a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel is the entry of a plea, the prejudice requirement is satisfied where the defendant shows “a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s errors, he would not have pleaded guilty and would have insisted on going to trial.” [8] Where the outcome underlying a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel was the loss of a favorable plea, prejudice requires a showing that the defendant would have accepted the plea but for counsel’s deficient performance, the prosecutor would not have withdrawn the offer, the court would have accepted the offer, and the conviction or sentence under the offer’s terms would have been less severe than the sentence that was ultimately imposed. [9]

Newly discovered evidence is another type of claim that can be raised in a postconviction petition.

If you or someone you love is in need of postconviction relief, contact Peter Armstrong, Attorney at Law, for a free consultation.

Citations:
1. Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335, 344 (1963).
2. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 685 (1984).
3. Id. at 686 (quoting McMann v. Richardson, 397 U.S. 759, 771 n.14 (1970)).
4. Id. at 687.
5. Id. at 688.
6. Id. at 688-89.
7. Id. at 694.
8. Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52, 59 (1985).
9. Lafler v. Cooper, 566 U.S. 156 (2012).