Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/boundvolumes/529bv.pdf
Page Number: 442.0

529US2

Unit: $U46

[10-07-01 17:18:24] PAGES PGT: OPIN

Cite as: 529 U. S. 362 (2000)

367

Opinion of the Court

Justice Stevens announced the judgment of the Court
and delivered the opinion of the Court with respect to Parts
I, III, and IV, and an opinion with respect to Parts II and V.*

The questions presented are whether Terry Williams’ con-
stitutional right to the effective assistance of counsel as
deﬁned in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U. S. 668 (1984),
was violated, and whether the judgment of the Virginia Su-
preme Court refusing to set aside his death sentence “was
contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of,
clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Su-
preme Court of the United States,” within the meaning of
28 U. S. C. § 2254(d)(1) (1994 ed., Supp. III). We answer
both questions afﬁrmatively.

I

On November 3, 1985, Harris Stone was found dead in his
residence on Henry Street in Danville, Virginia. Finding no
indication of a struggle, local ofﬁcials determined that the
cause of death was blood alcohol poisoning, and the case was
considered closed. Six months after Stone’s death, Terry
Williams, who was then incarcerated in the “I” unit of the
city jail for an unrelated offense, wrote a letter to the police
stating that he had killed “ ‘that man down on Henry
Street’ ” and also stating that he “ ‘did it’ ” to that “ ‘lady
down on West Green Street’ ” and was “ ‘very sorry.’ ” The
letter was unsigned, but it closed with a reference to “I cell.”
App. 41. The police readily identiﬁed Williams as its author,
and, on April 25, 1986, they obtained several statements from
him.
In one Williams admitted that, after Stone refused to
lend him “ ‘a couple of dollars,’ ” he had killed Stone with a

*Justice Souter, Justice Ginsburg, and Justice Breyer join this
opinion in its entirety. Justice O’Connor and Justice Kennedy join
Parts I, III, and IV of this opinion.