POSTVERDICTS LAW LIBRARY
What Does Strickland v. Washington Require?
Strickland v. Washington is the leading U.S. Supreme Court decision governing most ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims. It requires both deficient performance and prejudice. A court may reject a claim for failure to prove either part.
General educational information only. Not legal advice.
Important terms
Performance is assessed from counsel's perspective at the time, with a strong presumption of reasonable professional assistance.
A reasonable probability is one sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome; it is not necessarily proof that a different result was more likely than not.
The totality of the evidence matters to the prejudice inquiry.
Why it can matter
Strickland organizes the claim around specific conduct, the information available to counsel, the investigation performed, and the effect on the proceeding.
Records such as correspondence, discovery, investigator files, plea communications, expert materials, and affidavits may be relevant depending on the alleged error.
Limits to keep in mind
Courts avoid evaluating counsel's decisions with hindsight. Reasonable strategic decisions are generally not deficient merely because they were unsuccessful.
In federal habeas review, AEDPA can add another layer of deference when a state court has already adjudicated the Strickland claim on the merits.