In which of the following situations has the Court determined the defendant had ineffective assistance of counsel?

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

In Strickland v. Washington, the Supreme Court established a two-part test for determining whether a defendant received ineffective assistance of counsel. The first prong requires a showing that counsel's performance was deficient, meaning that it fell below an objective standard of reasonableness. The second prong requires a showing that the deficient performance prejudiced the defendant, meaning that there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different. Among the specific types of deficient performance that have been found to constitute ineffective assistance of counsel is a failure to conduct a reasonable investigation into the defendant's social history and mitigating factors, which can be especially important in capital cases. Of the options given, only choice C meets this criterion. Choices A, B, and D involve specific instances of deficient performance, but not necessarily deficient performance as a whole. It is possible that a lawyer could sleep through parts of a trial or remain silent during closing arguments without adequately prejudicing the defendant. Similarly, while it is generally considered unethical for a lawyer to represent two clients with conflicting interests, such a representation alone may not rise to the level of ineffective assistance of counsel.

In Which of the Following Situations Has the Court Determined