Opinion ID: 1769614
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: Sixth Circuit

Text: The applicable rule in this Circuit is set forth in an excellent and exhaustive opinion by Judge Celebrezze in Beasley v. United States, 491 F.2d 687 (6th Cir.1974). Prior to that case, the Sixth Circuit had adhered to the farce and mockery test. In 1970, the Supreme Court of the United States handed down its decision in McMann v. Richardson, 397 U.S. 759, 90 S.Ct. 1441, 25 L.Ed.2d 763 (1970), wherein the Court held that the advice rendered by an attorney as to whether a confession would be admissible in evidence must be within the range of competence demanded of attorneys in criminal cases. In view of that decision, the Court, in Beasley stated that: (T)he farce and mockery test should be abandoned as a meaningful standard for testing Sixth Amendment claims. 491 F.2d at 693 Further, the Court said with respect to the farce and mockery standard: (W)e reject it, except as it may be considered a conclusory description of the objective standard we adopt. Id. at 695 The new standard adopted in the Sixth Circuit is as follows: (T)he assistance of counsel required under the Sixth Amendment is counsel reasonably likely to render and rendering reasonably effective assistance. It is a violation of this standard for defense counsel to deprive a criminal defendant of a substantial defense by his own ineffectiveness or incompetence. (Citing cases). Defense counsel must perform at least as well as a lawyer with ordinary training and skill in the criminal law and must conscientiously protect his client's interest, undeflected by conflicting considerations. (Citing cases) Defense counsel must investigate all apparently substantial defenses available to the defendant and must assert them in a proper and timely manner. (Citing cases). Id. at 696