51 Cited authorities

Strickland v. Washington
466 U.S. 668 (1984) Cited 158,573 times 176 Legal Analyses
Holding an "error by counsel" doesn't "warrant setting aside the judgment of a criminal proceeding" where in the context of the whole proceeding the identified error "had no effect on the judgment"
Jones v. Barnes
463 U.S. 745 (1983) Cited 11,144 times 21 Legal Analyses
Holding that it was not ineffective assistance for appellate counsel to decline to make every nonfrivolous argument requested by the defendant
Faretta v. California
422 U.S. 806 (1975) Cited 12,532 times 23 Legal Analyses
Holding that a defendant's right to self-representation was denied when he made his requests "weeks before trial" without any indication that the defendant was required to reassert his request during the trial
United States v. Cronic
466 U.S. 648 (1984) Cited 7,357 times 30 Legal Analyses
Holding defendant is constructively denied counsel during critical stage of criminal proceedings where counsel, inter alia, "fails to subject the prosecution's case to meaningful adversarial testing"
McMann v. Richardson
397 U.S. 759 (1970) Cited 7,404 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that even a possible misjudgment about admissibility of evidence is not ineffective assistance.
Florida v. Nixon
543 U.S. 175 (2004) Cited 1,162 times 8 Legal Analyses
Holding that counsel provided effective assistance when he conceded the defendant's guilt during a capital murder trial while maintaining the right to cross-examine the prosecution's witnesses, because this was acceptable strategy to focus his preparation on finding and presenting mitigating evidence during the penalty phase in an attempt to ward off the death penalty
Sandstrom v. Montana
442 U.S. 510 (1979) Cited 3,142 times 8 Legal Analyses
Holding that a conclusive presumption that relieves the State of its burden of proof on an element of an offense is unconstitutional
People v. Benevento
91 N.Y.2d 708 (N.Y. 1998) Cited 4,212 times 2 Legal Analyses
In People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, 713-14 (1998), the New York Court of Appeals held that "meaningful representation" included a prejudice component which focuses on the "fairness of the process as a whole rather than [any] particular impact on the outcome of the case."
People v. Baldi
54 N.Y.2d 137 (N.Y. 1981) Cited 5,974 times 6 Legal Analyses
In Baldi, the New York State Court of Appeals expressly applied the right to effective assistance of counsel guaranteed by the federal Constitution.
People v. Caban
5 N.Y.3d 143 (N.Y. 2005) Cited 1,636 times
Holding conspirators' statements admissible as verbal acts to prove existence of conspiracy but not, absent independent evidence of the conspiracy, for their truth

The People, Respondent,v.Akieme Nesbitt, Appellant.

51 Cited authorities

Holding an "error by counsel" doesn't "warrant setting aside the judgment of a criminal proceeding" where in the context of the whole proceeding the identified error "had no effect on the judgment"

Holding that it was not ineffective assistance for appellate counsel to decline to make every nonfrivolous argument requested by the defendant

Holding that a defendant's right to self-representation was denied when he made his requests "weeks before trial" without any indication that the defendant was required to reassert his request during the trial

Holding defendant is constructively denied counsel during critical stage of criminal proceedings where counsel, inter alia, "fails to subject the prosecution's case to meaningful adversarial testing"

Holding that even a possible misjudgment about admissibility of evidence is not ineffective assistance.

Holding that a conclusive presumption that relieves the State of its burden of proof on an element of an offense is unconstitutional

In People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, 713-14 (1998), the New York Court of Appeals held that "meaningful representation" included a prejudice component which focuses on the "fairness of the process as a whole rather than [any] particular impact on the outcome of the case."

In Baldi, the New York State Court of Appeals expressly applied the right to effective assistance of counsel guaranteed by the federal Constitution.

Holding conspirators' statements admissible as verbal acts to prove existence of conspiracy but not, absent independent evidence of the conspiracy, for their truth