Opinion ID: 1769614
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Fifth Circuit

Text: In Herring v. Estelle, 491 F.2d 125 (5th Cir.1974), the Court traces the history of the applicable standards; points out that since the decision in MacKenna v. Ellis, 280 F.2d 592 (5th Cir.1960), that Court has applied the reasonably effective assistance standard many times; that for several years following the decision in Williams v. Beto, 354 F.2d 698 (5th Cir.1965), the Court used the farce-mockery language with some frequency, and in effect wound up by adopting a standard requiring counsel to render reasonably effective assistance. This is the construction placed upon Herring by the same Circuit in Hudson v. State of Alabama, 493 F.2d 171 (5th Cir.1974), wherein the Court stated: Under the standards of this circuit, Hudson was entitled to counsel reasonably likely to render and rendering reasonably effective assistance.