Document: 466 U.S. 668 104 S.Ct. 2052 80 L.Ed.2d 674 Charles E. STRICKLAND, Superintendent, Florida State Prison, et al., Petitionersv.David Leroy WASHINGTON. No. 82-1554. Supreme Court of the United States Argued Jan. 10, 1984. Decided May 14, Rehearing Denied June 25, Syllabus Respondent pleaded guilty in a trial court to an indictment that included three capital murder charges. In plea colloquy, respondent told judge that, although he had committed string burglaries, no significant prior criminal record and at time his spree was under extreme stress caused by inability support family. The "a great deal respect for people who are willing step forward admit their responsibility." preparing sentencing hearing, defense counsel spoke with about background, but did not seek out character witnesses or request psychiatric examination. Counsel's decision present evidence concerning respondent's emotional state reflected judgment it advisable rely on colloquy as such matters, thus preventing from cross-examining presenting its own. Counsel presentence report because would have history thereby undermined claim record. Finding numerous aggravating circumstances mitigating circumstance, sentenced death each counts. affirmed, then sought collateral relief ground, inter alia, rendered ineffective assistance proceeding several respects, including failure report, investigate witnesses, report. denied relief, affirmed. filed habeas corpus petition Federal District advancing grounds counsel. After evidentiary concluding made errors failing further than did, prejudice sentence resulted any error judgment. Appeals ultimately reversed, stating Sixth Amendment accorded defendants right rendering "reasonably effective given totality circumstances." outlining standards judging whether fulfilled duty nonstatutory counsel's were sufficiently prejudicial justify reversal, remanded case application standards. Held: 1. is counsel, benchmark ineffectiveness must be conduct so proper functioning adversarial process cannot relied having produced just result. same principle applies proceeding—such one provided law—that like format existence role comparable trial. Pp. 2063-2064. 2. A convicted defendant's defective require reversal conviction setting aside requires defendant show, first, performance deficient and, second, prejudiced deprive fair 2064-2069. (a) standard attorney reasonably assistance, considering all circumstances. When complains show representation fell below objective reasonableness. Judicial scrutiny highly deferential, assessment every effort eliminate distorting effects hindsight, reconstruct challenged conduct, evaluate perspective time. indulge strong presumption falls within wide range reasonable professional assistance. These special amplification order define investigate, issue this case. 2064-2067. (b) With regard required showing prejudice, there probability unprofessional errors, result been different. sufficient undermine confidence outcome. hearing consider before jury. 2067-2069. 3. number practical considerations important set forth above. do establish mechanical rules; ultimate focus inquiry fundamental fairness whose being challenged. need first determine examining suffered alleged deficiencies. If easier dispose ground lack course should followed. principles governing claims apply federal proceedings they direct appeal motions new And challenge judgment, conclusion finding fact binding extent stated 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d), mixed question law fact. 2069-2070. 4. facts make clear found unreasonable above They also even assuming unreasonable, insufficient warrant sentence. 2070-2071. 693 F.2d 1243 (5th Cir.1982), reversed. Carolyn M. Snurkowski Calvin L. Fox, Tallahassee, Fla., petitioners. Richard Shapiro, Trenton, N.J., respondent. Justice O'CONNOR delivered opinion Court. 1 This us contention Constitution ineffective. 2 * A. 3 During 10-day period September 1976, planned groups crimes, which brutal stabbing murders, torture, kidnaping, severe assaults, attempted extortion, theft. two accomplices arrested, surrendered police voluntarily gave lengthy statement confessing third episodes. indicted kidnaping appointed experienced lawyer represent him. 4 actively pursued pretrial discovery. He cut efforts short, however, sense hopelessness case, when learned against specific advice, confessed murders. By date trial, subject counts first-degree multiple robbery, ransom, breaking entering assault, murder, conspiracy commit robbery. waived jury again acting charges, 5 App. 50-53. stated, accepted responsibility crimes. E.g., id., 54, 57. responsibility" making likely decision. Id., 62. 6 advised invoke advisory hearing. rejected advice right. chose instead without recommendation. 7 background. telephone wife mother, though follow up unsuccessful meet them. otherwise Pet. Cert. A265. Nor examination, since conversations client indication psychological problems. A266. 8 decided hence look state. That overcoming effect confessions gruesome See A282. It background stress: communicated information these subjects, forgoing opportunity prevented putting A223-A225. 9 excluded other thought potentially damaging. successfully moved exclude "rap sheet." A227; 311. Because judged might prove more detrimental helpful, activity, prepared. A227-A228, A265-A266. 10 At strategy based primarily judge's remarks well reputation own crime. argued remorse acceptance justified sparing him penalty. activity crimes mental disturbance, coming statutory list spared surrendered, confessed, offered testify codefendant fundamentally good person briefly gone badly wrong extremely stressful put largely purpose describing details cross-examine medical experts testified manner victims. 11 murders especially heinous, atrocious, cruel, involving repeated stabbings. All least dangerous violent felony, involved pecuniary gain. avoid arrest accompanying hinder enforcement. knowingly subjected persons grave risk deliberately shooting victim's sisters-in-law, sustained fatal—injuries. 12 circumstances, findings First, admitted convictions, engaged stealing. if "would still clearly far outweigh" factor. Second, during suffering disturbance could appreciate criminality acts. Third, none victims participant in, consented to, conduct. Fourth, participation neither minor nor duress domination accomplice. Finally, age (26) considered factor mitigation, viewed light planning disposition proceeds various thefts. 13 (or single comparatively insignificant) circumstance. convictions concluded: "A careful consideration matters presented impels . outweigh Washington v. State, 362 So.2d 658, 663-664 (Fla.1978), (quoting findings), cert. denied, 441 937, 99 2063, 60 666 (1979). therefore prison terms upheld sentences appeal. B 14 subsequently grounds, among them proceeding. six respects. asserted failed move continuance prepare sentencing, investigation meaningful arguments judge, examiner's reports experts. claim, submitted affidavits friends, neighbors, relatives asked so. respondent, influence "chronically frustrated depressed economic dilemma" 7; see 14. 15 conclusively showed meritless. A206-A243. Four assertedly little discussion. continuance, requesting guilty. A218-A220. serious discretion grant admission sheet" assertion activity. A226-A228. argument memorandum "admirable" overwhelming absence A228. examine testifying victims, died ways shown unchallenged evidence. A229. 16 dealt greater length bases claim. pointed examination conducted soon after initial arraignment. states major illness Moreover, both dilemma," disturbance. directly crime spree. Accordingly, decide reports; indeed, relying solely contention, rebut testimony. event, substantial attack. 17 develop much reasons. nothing certain basically worried family's financial himself already along those lines colloquy. stealing rebutted many factual allegations affidavits. For reasons, appropriate history, 18 Applying articulated Knight 394 997 (1981), concluded deficiency measurably competent affected outcome specifically found: "[A]s matter law, affirmatively demonstrates beyond doubt [counsel] done things [that do] remotest chance plain proved completely overwhelming. ." A230. 19 affirmed denial relief. 397 285 (1981). essentially reasons court, prima facie either "substantial possible prejudice" "failed degree we believe, point moral certainty, entitled 287. Respondent's "shown merit obviate hearing." 286. C 20 next writ Southern Florida. advanced except identified court. held inquire into proceedings; called testify. Florida, over objection, 21 disputed consistent findings. account actions decisions reflects combined On legal ineffectiveness, Relying part testimony factors led courts find "there does appear likelihood, possibility," A285-A286. went reject exhausted because, urged consideration. A286-A292. accordingly corpus. 22 appeal, panel Fifth Circuit part, vacated instructions particular framework analyzing developed opinion. 673 879 Cir.1982). itself Unit former Circuit, now Eleventh rehear en banc. 679 23 (1982). full reversed factfinding newly announced noted outset raised unexhausted Court, characterized rule Rose Lundy, 455 509, 102 1198, 71 379 (1982), requiring dismissal entire petition. held, exhaustion requirement comity rather jurisdiction" exceptions. agreed came exception rule. F.2d, 1248, n. 7. 24 Turning merits, "counsel render 1250. remarked passing cases it: punishment faces merely determining effective. 1250, 12. addressed breached 25 imposes informed choices can only options. observed investigatory assessed known decisions, "[t]he amount defies precise measurement." 1251. Nevertheless, guilty-plea side, classify issues scope 26 plausible line defense, concluded, investigation" strategic choice renders unnecessary. 1252. exists relies others available. exhaustive. include " 'an independent facts, pleadings laws involved.' 1253 Rummel Estelle, 590 103, (CA5 1979)). duty, depends strength government's likelihood pursuing leads may harmful helpful. 1253, 16. 27 ideally substantially conducts investigations, "will seldom ever" wanting. advocacy art science, adversary system deference respected 1254. nonetheless 1257-1258. Limitations money, force early choices, often review prosecution's Those pursue owed commensurate reasonableness judgments based. Thus, "when assumptions represents upon assumptions, has chosen employ trial." 1255 (footnote omitted). Among relevant deciding experience attorney, inconsistency unpursued potential taking defense. 1256-1257, 23. 29 Having outlined turned attention outright affirmative government interference process, inherently conflicts interest said made. 1258-1259. where responsible deficiencies accessible prosecution, "resulted actual disadvantage defense." 1262. standard, reasoned, compatible "cause procedural defaults discourages insubstantial showing, virtually always made, some conceivable adverse errors. specified unless prosecution constitutionally was, evidence, harmless doubt. 1260-1262. 30 laid down tests applied challenges Although judges proposed different approaches generally petitions prisoners, 1264-1280 (opinion Tjoflat, J.); 1280 Clark, 1285-1288 Roney, J., joined Fay Hill, JJ.); 1288-1291 J.), believed remand necessary 1281-1285 Johnson, Anderson, majority banc Summarily rejecting remand, finally ruled, testimony, admissible "to contains personal knowledge historical expert opinion," explain processes reaching 1262-1263; Fayerweather Ritch, 195 276, 306-307, 58, 67-68, 49 L.Ed. 193 (1904). D 31 Petitioners, officials certiorari seeking Appeals. presents type previously generality. constructive altogether, ability accused. Cronic, 648, 2039, 657. Cuyler Sullivan, 446 335, 100 1708, 64 333 (1980), conflict interest, never fully "actual ineffectiveness" going Cf. Agurs, 427 97, 102, 5, 96 2392, 2397, 342 (1976). 32 assessing performance, Courts few adopted assistance" formulation another. Trapnell States, 725 149, 151-152 (CA2 1983); Brief supra, pp. 3a-6a; Sarno, Modern Status Rules Standards Adequacy Defense Representation Criminal Client, A.L.R. 4th 99-157, §§ 7-10 (1980). Yet occasion squarely standard. lower purport differ formulation. 7a-10a; 83-99, 6. particular, expressly Judge Leventhal plurality Decoster, 199 U.S.App.D.C. 359, 371, 374-375, 624 196, 208, 211-212 (en banc), 444 944, 302, 62 311 (1979), So.2d, 1001, 1261-1262. 33 granted overturned 462 1105, 103 2451, 77 1332 (1983). We agree petitions, strictly enforced, jurisdictional. U.S., 515-520, S.Ct., 1201-04. address merits constitutional issue. II 34 long includes Powell Alabama, 287 45, 53 55, 158 (1932), Johnson Zerbst, 304 458, 58 1019, 82 1461 (1938), Gideon Wainwright, 372 83 792, 799 (1963), recognized exists, needed, protect guarantees through Due Process Clauses, defines basic elements provisions Amendment, Clause: 35 "In prosecutions, accused shall enjoy speedy public impartial district wherein committed, ascertained nature cause accusation; confronted him; compulsory obtaining favor, Assistance defence." 36 testing tribunal resolution defined advance plays crucial embodied access skill accord "ample prosecution" entitled. Adams ex rel. McCann, 317 269, 275, 63 236, 240, 87 268 (1942); 68-69, 63-64. 37 vital importance exceptions, retained obtained. Argersinger Hamlin, 407 92 2006, 530 (1972); supra; supra. happens alongside accused, enough satisfy command. recognizes envisions playing critical produce results. An assisted appointed, ensure fair. reason, "the counsel." McMann Richardson, 759, 771, 90 1441, 1449, 763 (1970). Government violates interferes how See, e.g., Geders 425 80, 1330, 47 592 (1976) (bar attorney-client consultation overnight recess); Herring New York, 422 853, 95 2550, 45 593 (1975) summation bench trial); Brooks Tennessee, 406 605, 612-613, 1891, 1895, 358 (1972) (requirement witness); Ferguson Georgia, 365 570, 593-596, 81 756, 768-770, 783 (1961) defendant). Counsel, simply "adequate assistance," 344, 1716. 345-350, 1716-1719 (actual adversely affecting lawyer's ineffective). 38 elaborated meaning latter class cases—that is, ineffectiveness." giving requirement, take purpose—to trial—as guide. 39 law. ordinary involve informal standardless sentencer, approach definition decision, Barclay 463 939, 952-954, 3418, 3425, 1134 (1983); Bullington Missouri, 451 430, 101 1852, 68 270 trial—to works purposes duties, therefore, Florida's distinguished III 40 components. deficient. "counsel" guaranteed Amendment. reliable. Unless makes showings, breakdown unreliable. 41 As 151-152. indirectly 770, 1448, attacked inadequate attorney" "within competence demanded attorneys cases." 42 More guidelines appropriate. refers "counsel," specifying requirements profession's maintenance law's will fulfill envisions. Michel Louisiana, 350 91, 100-101, 76 158, 163-164, (1955). measure remains prevailing norms. 43 entails duties. function assist defendant, owes loyalty, interest. 346, 1717. From assistant derive overarching advocate duties consult keep developments prosecution. bring bear reliable process. 44 exhaustively obligations form checklist judicial evaluation performance. Prevailing norms practice American Bar Association like, ABA 4-1.1 4-8.6 (2d ed. 1980) ("The Function"), guides what reasonable, guides. No detailed rules satisfactorily variety faced legitimate regarding best defendant. Any interfere protected independence restrict latitude tactical decisions. U.S.App.D.C., 208. Indeed, distract overriding mission vigorous cause. guarantee improve quality representation, goal considerable system. receive deferential. too tempting second-guess sentence, easy unsuccessful, conclude act omission unreasonable. Engle Isaac, 456 107, 133-134, 1558, 1574-1575, difficulties inherent evaluation, assistance; overcome action "might sound strategy." 101, 164. There countless provide Even defend way. Goodpaster, Trial Life: Effective Death Penalty Cases, N.Y.U.L.Rev. 299, 343 46 availability intrusive post-trial encourage proliferation challenges. trials resolved unfavorably increasingly come followed second willingness serve affected. Intensive rigid acceptable dampen ardor impair discourage assigned cases, trust between client. identify acts omissions whether, outside professionally determination, mind function, norms, work time, recognize strongly presumed adequate exercise 48 thorough options unchallengeable; less complete precisely limitations investigation. words, investigations applying heavy judgments. determined influenced statements actions. usually based, quite properly, supplied critically information. example, said, considerably diminished eliminated altogether. reason believe fruitless harmful, later litigation 372-373, 209-210. 50 Morrison, 449 361, 364-365, 665, 667-668, 66 564 reliance constitute Constitution. 51 contexts, presumed. Actual altogether legally prejudice. So kinds 659, 2046-2047, 25. Prejudice case-by-case worth cost. 2046. impairments responsible, prevent. 52 One warrants similar, limited, 1716-1719, burdened breaches perhaps most difficult corrupted conflicting interests. Given obligation situations give rise conflicts, see, Fed.Rule Crim.Proc. 44(c), justice maintain fairly so, per se mentioned "actively represented interests" "an performance." 350, 348, 1719, 1718 Conflict aside, alleging general for, able prevent, Attorney infinite utterly prejudicial. classified according causing precision inform correctly avoid. art, brilliant shows actually Virtually test, cf. Valenzuela-Bernal, 458 858, 866-867, 3440, 3446-3447, 73 1193 conceivably undermines reliability suggests "impaired presentation 58. provides workable principle. Since error, indeed "impairs" way 54 hand, altered outcome-determinative strengths. familiar courts, inquiry, inevitable, anything precise. profound finality proceedings. comports widely used discovered Amicus Curiae 19-20, nn. 11. 55 results apt source draw claims. high presupposes essential presumptively accurate 327 106, 112, 464, 466, 562 (1946). asserts assurances reliable, concerns somewhat weaker lower. unreliable, unfair, preponderance 56 test finds roots materiality exculpatory disclosed 104, 112-113, 2401-2402, unavailable deportation witness, 872-874, 3449-3450. 57 determination presume, absent insufficiency, acted favorable possibility arbitrariness, whimsy, caprice, "nullification," like. entitlement luck lawless decisionmaker, reviewed. proceed assumption decisionmaker reasonably, conscientiously, impartially govern depend idiosyncracies unusual propensities toward harshness leniency. entered selection strategies limited extent, affect irrelevant inquiry. review, about, practices, determination. defining conviction, factfinder respecting guilt. sentencer—including appellate independently reweighs evidence—would balance death. 59 Some unaffected ways. pervasive inferences drawn altering picture, isolated, trivial effect. verdict weakly supported support. Taking given, due remaining findings, ask met burden reached IV outlined. Most important, adjudicating rules. guide concerned despite reliability, unreliable our 61 To guiding today reconsideration 153 (in years "farce mockery" "reasonable competence" "never hinged standard"). differences courts' formulations insignificant: mere variations strict heavier today. difference, alter rarest discussed component component, components one. object grade expect strive become burdensome suffers indicated waivers final strongest attacks Frady, 152, 162-169, 1584, 1591-1595, 816 (1982); 126-129, 1570-1572, articulation clear, attack central concern corpus, 126, 1570, ought 2254(d). Ineffectiveness "basic, primary, fac[t]," Townsend Sain, 293, 309, 6, 745, 755, 770 (1963). Rather, 342, 1714. erroneous Rule Civil Procedure 52(a), questions V 65 claims, think useful illustrate principles. fact, close Pullman-Standard Swint, 273, 291-292, 1781, 1791-1792, 72 Application described above, 671-678, 67 argue distress circumstance understandably felt hopeless prospects, 383-384, 400-401, indicates, reading Court's suggests, A282, distorted judgments, hand likewise reasonable. views owning one's surmise help. mention substance know troubles. Restricting ensured contrary exclude, in. question, 69 stark. says barely profile judge. found, knew psychiatrist psychologist level factors, omitted changed outweighed hence, imposed. offers case: probably contradicted 70 Our conclusions admissibility although, 695, resolvable, rejected, properly meritless holding Failure defeats Here double failure. generally, unfair. conclude, declined Reversed. 74 BRENNAN, concurring dissenting part. 75 I join dissent Adhering my view penalty cruel forbidden Eighth Fourteenth Amendments, Gregg 428 153, 227, 2909, 2971, 859 (BRENNAN, dissenting), vacate proceedings.1 657, occasions elaborate considers context "in surrounding [make] unlikely [is] trial," 661, 2048. contrast, counsel—claims which, very nature, attorney's kind thereby. 26, 2047, 26. sets helpful guidance permit continue achieve progressive development area Like matter, ante, 683-684, concludes assistance." Ante, 687. And, "outcome-determinative" employed adopts "show different," probability" outcome." 694. distinctions derelictions rights not; flexible accommodate kind. 78 "particular conduct" inappropriate. 688. Precisely measured stunt doctrine area," post, 709 (MARSHALL, dissenting). suggestion today's taken 696, indicates basis common-law tradition, past. Similarly, erect insurmountable obstacle meritorious carefully records seriousness 695.2 79 flexibility attend contrast phase lesser alone. consequences incompetent not, course, greater. Recognizing unique proceeding, repeatedly emphasized 'where afforded body human life spared, suitably directed minimize wholly arbitrary capricious action.' Zant Stephens, 862, 874, 2733, 2741, 235 (1983) 188-189, 2932-2933 Stewart, POWELL, STEVENS, JJ.)). consistently policed stages vigilant accuracy factfinding. MARSHALL last Term: "This insisted safeguards particularly stake. Long established felony 71-72, 65, (1932). Time condemned procedures (1981); Beck 447 625, 2382, 392 (1980); Green 442 95, 2150, 738 (1979) (per curiam); Lockett Ohio, 438 586, 98 2954, 973 (1978); Gardner 430 349, 97 1197, 393 (1977); Woodson North Carolina, 280, 2978, 944 "Because th[e] difference punishments, 'a corresponding case.' Ibid." Barefoot 880, 913-914, 3383, 3405, 1090 (dissenting opinion). 924, 3405 (BLACKMUN, care "imposed whim, passion, mistake." Eddings Oklahoma, 118, 869, 878, (1982) (O'CONNOR, concurring). 84 "[w]hat individual fate determine." Jurek Texas, 262, 2950, 2958, 929 JJ.). sentencer permitted factor." 875. noted, aspects creates unacceptable unconstitutionally imposed below, "interests justice" impose reviewing [the] resentencing." 117, n., 119, 877, 878 85 Of present, consider, means fails mitigation Comment, Colum.L.Rev. 1544, 1549 Burger Zant, 718 979 (CA11 1983) (defendant, old crime, mitigation), stay granted, 902, 1676, 151 (1984). 690, takes supreme developing death; care. 86 rejects ineffective-assistance understood reflect diminution commitment 'the humanity underlying offender offense indispensable inflicting death.' 875 304, 2991, am satisfied go towards assisting discharging receives MARSHALL, dissenting. 88 Amendments aid settled distinguishing assistance.1 Today, attempts synthesize clarify majority's unhelpful. Neither principal holdings seems me adjudication zeal survey comprehensively field doctrine, generalizations suggestions unacceptable. importantly, locus 89 revolves around holdings. ties minima simple "standard reasonableness." holds impact "undermine outcome" overturning conviction. disagree rulings. My objection malleable practice, grip yield excessive variation interpreted courts. tell lawyers behave "reasonably" attorney," 687, almost nothing. essence, instructed assess advert intuitions constitutes "professional" discouraged trying view, abdicated interpret Constitution, impaired theirs. 91 debilitating ambiguity "objective reasonableness" illustrated mandated unfortunate undeniable means, selecting paying prepares thoroughly, obtain better available indigent who, turn, resources devote Is adequately paid attorney? parts country varies significantly. Should vary locale?2 clues responses questions. defends refusal adopt "[n]o defendant." 688-689. "wide latitude" "tactical decisions" strategy, 689; infra, 712-713, job amenable oversight. bail, conferring client, timely objections significant, arguably rulings filing notice colorable therefor profitably uniform 93 attempt particularized designed 1243, 1251-1258 1982) banc). other, efforts, 159 326, 333-334, 487 1203-1204 (1973), disapproved rehearing, 196 (1979); Coles Peyton, 389 224, 226 (CA4), 849, 120 (1968); People Pope, Cal.3d 412, 424-425, P.2d 859, 866, 152 Cal.Rptr. 732, 739 Harper, Wis.2d 543, 55-557, 205 N.W.2d 1, 6-9 (1973).3 refusing proposals, suggesting worthwhile, fear, area. 94 ineffectively fared competent. Seemingly impregnable sometimes dismantled cold record, impossible confidently ascertain stood rebuttal cross-examination shrewd, well-prepared lawyer. estimating exacerbated injury missing incompetence counsel.4 impediments senseless demonstrating Second fundamentally, rests reduce innocent convicted. functions obtained procedures.5 contends violated manifestly attorney. agree. Every interests vigorously conscientiously advocated meeting forces opinion, Chapman California, 386 18, 23, 824, 827, 705 (1967), acknowledged "so infraction treated error." 8, 8; (1963).6 entailed abridgment equivalent latter.7 hold departed prescribed regardless demonstrable inclined holdings, abide elaborates Particularly regrettable discussion "presumption" lawyers' prejudge using appropriately notes problems confronting legitimate" responses. 689. cautions amongst options, hubris hindsight. Ibid. goes on, suggest "indulge acceptable, ibid.; "appl[y] judgments," 691. sure phrases mean, self-explanatory denote claiming proof, But adjectives "strong" "heavy" read imposing unusually weighty persuasion. intent, respectfully dissent. behavior "prevailing norms," 688, broad allow responding novel strategy. afford latitude, "strongly presuming" fall zone reasonableness, covertly justification undue receptivity raise clog frivolous suits "dampen ardor" 690. expeditiously innovative lawyering inhibited. gained lost instructing insubstantial. debating "effective" Different forgiving "farce-and-mockery" standard,8 while versions standard.9 compel positions, ranging stringent test,10 automatically defendant.11 resolves disputes. expected 687-691, affects different, 691-696. Curiously, though, discounts significance rulings, differently 696-697. Surely surprised learn fiercely debated unimportant. comments seem prompted principally reluctance acknowledge reassessment ineffective-assistance-of-counsel unhappiness score understandable, mitigate perceived problem ineffectual. Nothing relieve hitherto tolerant ineffectual scrutinize new, 105 "[f]or duties," "need 106 stricter adherence cases. 107 "[T]he qualitatively imprisonment, however long. Death, finality, differs imprisonment 100-year term year two. qualitative case." 305, (plurality opinion) omitted).12 108 protections administered rationality. "Reliability" imposition approximated "all amassing organized persuasive entrusted efforts,13 severity irrevocability sanction stake, "effective stringently proceedings.14 109 achieved modification BRENNAN adjustment effected construing phrase, "reasonableness impending 704-706. Though prefer iteration context,15 accept proposal. However, resentencing, explicitly modify itself.16 row, levels, compelled demonstrate competent, 694; surely redetermination fate. 121-122, 2405-2406, dissenting).17 110 expressed preceding section oblige us.18 undisputed relatives, employers pertaining Had experience, non-violent man, devoted family, active affairs church. 338-365. "humanize" counteract impression conveyed cold-blooded killer. admitted, argues, chances significantly better. 111 Measured contentions substantial. Experienced members death-penalty bar adducing establishes social familial connections. 300-303, 334-335 colorable—though compelling—argument "strategic" unadorned acknowledgment reputed actions.19 justifiable him, garnered acquaintances "reasonable." suspicious candid feeling "hopelessness" saving life, 400-401. 112 implicated substantial, 700, vitiate claim; juries egregious mercy, facets personality life.20 defeated material law; refuse addition tips scales favor imprisonment." 958, 3431, (STEVENS, judgment) (emphasis original). 113 investigated possibilities, conjoined unreasonableness violation entitle 114 leaves standing another increasing purportedly compliance beginning Earlier Term, reiterated proven unequal task eliminating irrationality necessarily attends juries, judges, spare life. Pulley Harris, 465 37, 59, 871, 886, (1984) difficulty Furman 408 238, 274-277, 2726, 2744-2746, 346 concurring); McGautha 402 183, 248-312, 1454, 1487-1520, 711 (1971) confirmed extraordinary pressure deliberations recent months growing applications executions. Wainwright Adams, 964, 965, 2183, 2184, 809 dissenting) (stating "haste confusion [to stay] degrading judges"); Autry McKaskle, 1085, 1458, 906 (criticizing "dramatically expediting normal deliberative execution"); Stephens Kemp, 464 1027, 1032, 562, 565, 370 (POWELL, (contending "undermines follow"); Sullivan 109, 450, 465, 210 (BURGER, C.J., concurring) (accusing client's turning administration [a] sporting contest"); 20, (suggesting "injects uncertainty disparity procedure, adds burdens distorts increases error"). generates Members rises 659-660, 2047; Javor 724 831, 834 (CA9 1984) ("Prejudice unconscious sleeping all"). Note, Identifying Remedying Ineffective Counsel: Look Harv.L.Rev. 752, 756-758 Fair Guarantee, U.Chi.L.Rev. 1380, 1386-1387, 1399-1401, 1408-1410 Cf., Moore 432 730, 736 (CA3 1970) (defining customary normally prevails place"). attempting Erickson, Competency Case, Am.Crim.L.Rev. 233, 242-248 Many heavily Association. 4-1.1-4-8.6 1981). Ellison, 557 128, 131 (CA7 1977). discussing related measuring joint interests, observed: [T]he evil refrain doing, negotiations resulting undertake tasks, intelligently tactics, impossible. here require, unlike unguided speculation." Holloway Arkansas, 435 475, 490-491, 1173, 1181-1182, 426 (1978) actions, "compelled" incompetent, equally consequent omissions. 454-457, 291-294 banc) (Bazelon, Harv.L.Rev., 767-770. effectively, refused injured. Glasser 315 60, 75-76, 457, 467-468, 680 (1942), held: "To [a defendant] court's appointment [the codefendants interests] once absolute nice calculations arising denial." acknowledges, 662, 31, 2048, blame inadequacy received Yelardy, 567 863, 865, (CA6), 439 842, 133, 140 Beasley 491 696 (CA6 1974); Commonwealth Badger, 482 Pa. 243-244, A.2d 642, 644 (1978). Pacheco, 121 Ariz. 88, 588 830, 833 Hoover Ark. 978, 980, 606 S.W.2d 749, 751 Line 272 Ind. 353, 354-355, N.E.2d 975, 976 155 Cooper Fitzharris, 586 1325, 1328-1330 1978) 440 974, 1542, 793 370, 74, opinion); 997, 1001 (Fla.1981). 7, 884-885, 2744, 110-112, 873-875, 604, 2964, 303 points out, 704, additional pertains disruptive liability Part I-A, sensible formulate proceedings, 343-345, 360-362. succeeding section, assume, sake argument, I-B, preclude issue, responded estimate confidence" true unconstitutional 231, 2973, vote Two undercut State's explanation apparent why adducement connections inconsistent acknowledgement behavior. possesses—and frequently exercises—the power overturn deems unwarranted Dixon, 283 (Fla.1973). try humanize benefit deemed create Farmer & Kinard, Phase (1976), reprinted California Public Defender, Manual N-33, N-45

Category: 1