Opinion ID: 3046626
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Supreme Court’s Decision in Lafler

Text: In Lafler, the Supreme Court clarified that the Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel under Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S. Ct. 2052 (1984), extends to the negotiation and consideration of plea offers that are rejected. See Lafler, 566 U.S. at ___, 132 S. Ct. at 1385. The Supreme Court held that, in order to show prejudice under Strickland’s two-part test, a defendant must demonstrate a reasonable probability that: (1) he would have accepted a plea offer but for counsel’s ineffective assistance; and (2) the plea would have resulted in a lesser charge or a lower sentence. Id. at ___, 132 S. Ct. at 1391. Subsequently, in In re Perez, 682 F.3d 930 (11th Cir. 2012), this Court considered whether Lafler announced a new rule of constitutional law, made retroactive to cases on collateral review by the Supreme Court, for purposes of filing a second or successive motion to vacate under § 2255(h)(2). This Court held that Lafler did not announce a new rule of constitutional law because it merely was an application of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel, as defined in Strickland, to a specific factual context. Perez, 682 F.3d at 932. This Court further reasoned 8 Case: 13-14133 Date Filed: 01/15/2015 Page: 9 of 10 that the Supreme Court had long recognized that Strickland’s two-part standard applied to ineffective assistance claims arising out of the plea process. Id. Applying Teague, this Court concluded that Lafler did not break new ground or impose new obligations on either the State or federal government, and its holding was dictated by Strickland. Id. at 933.