Establishing the right to effective assistance of counsel.

The Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees that

“[i]n all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall … have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.”

At first glance, this seems fairly straightforward. If you are accused of a crime, you are entitled to have a lawyer represent you.

But what happens if the lawyer is no good? What happens if the lawyer makes a series of incompetent decisions? Does the Constitution guarantee criminal defendants only the presence of someone with a heartbeat and a law license without regard to the decisions made?

The Supreme Court confronted many of these issues within the last hundred years. Arguably, the first big decision originated out of Jackson County, Alabama, in Powell v. Alabama from 1932. [1] The case began on a train with a group of black males fighting some white males and throwing most of them off the train. [2] Two white females accused the black males of raping them. [3] These boys, later known as the Scottsboro boys, were illiterate, surrounded by hostility and the possibility of mob violence, and had no assistance of counsel but for the gesture of arraignment on charges and no investigation going into trial. [4] Each was convicted in a series of swiftly held trials and sentenced to death. [5] The Supreme Court held that the trial court’s failure to make an effective appointment of counsel was a denial of constitutional due process. [6]

One of the next major developments happened in Johnson v. Zerbst, from 1938. [7] Johnson was a marine on leave who was accused of passing counterfeit money in South Carolina. [8] He was held without bail, unable to afford an attorney, and forced to trial without an attorney because the law in the state at that time did not appoint an attorney unless the defendant was charged with a crime punishable by death. [9] The Supreme Court found that the assistance of counsel was essential to due process and the district court’s authority to deprive Johnson of liberty. [10] The Court further rejected the suggestion that Johnson had voluntarily and intelligently waived his right to counsel. [11]

Glasser v. United States also warrants discussion. [12] Therein, Glasser and his codefendant, Kretske, both federal prosecutors, were charged with conspiracy to defraud the United States. [13] After Kretske dismissed his attorney, the trial court asked Glasser’s attorney to also represent Kretske. [14] Building from its prior decisions, the Supreme Court held that the constitutional right to the assistance of counsel also envisions conflict-free counsel. [15]

The landmark decision of Gideon v. Wainwright changed everything. [16] In Panama City, Florida, Gideon was accused of breaking into a poolroom with intent to commit a misdemeanor. [17] He requested an attorney and the state court denied the appointment of counsel because he was not charged with an offense punishable by death. [18] Thus, Gideon represented himself at trial as best he could, was convicted, and sentenced to prison. [19] The case eventually reached the Supreme Court which recognized

“that in our adversary system of criminal justice, any person haled into court, who is too poor to hire a lawyer, cannot be assured a fair trial unless counsel is provided for him. This seems to us to be an obvious truth.” [20]

Thus, Gideon firmly established the right to counsel. As a humorous anecdote, Gideon’s face is now memorialized on a metal power box placed in between the Panama City courthouse and the public defender’s office which his case helped create.

Returning to the initial question, the right to have an attorney is fine and good, but what about the right to the effective assistance of counsel? In 1970, the Supreme Court noted that “defendants facing felony charges are entitled to the effective assistance of competent counsel.” [21] However, the standard remained somewhat uncertain until 1984 when the Supreme Court issued its decision in Strickland v. Washington. [22] Therein, the Court made it clear that the constitutional right to the assistance of counsel means the right to the effective assistance of counsel. [23]

“That a person who happens to be a lawyer is present at trial alongside the accused, however, is not enough to satisfy the constitutional command.” [24]

The Court then set forth the standard for proving a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel: (1) counsel rendered deficient performance as measured by an objective standard of reasonableness, and (2) resulting prejudice that, but for counsel’s deficient performance, there is a reasonable probability that the results of the proceeding would have been different. [25]

It is worth remembering that each of these cases involved real human beings that endured years while their cases played out in the courts. Each litigant likely had parents, spouses, relatives, and friends who suffered through the years alongside their incarcerated loved one.

The constitutional right to counsel means little unless counsel is effective. If you or someone you love suffered from ineffective assistance of counsel, contact Peter Armstrong, Attorney at Law, for a free consultation.

Citations:

1.    Powell v. Ala., 287 U.S. 45 (1932). (https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/287/45/)

2.    Id. at 50-51.

3.    Id.

4.    Id. at 56-58.

5.    Id. at 50.

6.    Id. at 71.

7.    Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458 (1938). (https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/304/458/)

8.    Id. at 459-60.

9.    Id. at 460-61.

10. Id. at 467-68.

11. Id. at 465-68.

12. Glasser v. U.S., 315 U.S. 60 (1942). (https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/315/60/)

13. Id. at 63.

14. Id. at 68-69.

15. Id. at 69-70.

16. Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963). (https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/372/335/)

17. Id. at 336-37.

18. Id. at 337.

19. Id. at 337-38.

20. Id. at 344.

21. McMann v. Richardson, 397 U.S. 759, 771 n.14 (1970). (https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/397/759/)

22. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984). (https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/466/668/)

23. Id. at 685-86.

24. Id. at 685.

25. Id. at 687.