The Supreme Court has ruled that death penalty defendants must be represented by

The Supreme Court has ruled that death penalty defendants must be represented by adequate legal counsel. According to the Strickland case, judges must find that both the trial lawyer’s performance was ineffective and that there is a reasonable likelihood that the outcome of the trial would have been different if the lawyer had been competent. This means the defendant cannot receive a new trial even if their lawyer failed to present evidence of innocence during the trial unless the judges also find that this evidence would have led the jury to acquit the defendant.
After reading the case study, do you believe the performance of Gary Graham’s trial lawyer fell below an “objective standard of reasonableness” and can be consider an ineffective counsel based on the Strickland case? Why or why not?
Based on the case study, is there “a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different” in the Graham case? Why or why not?
Lastly, should there be national standards for attorney performance in capital cases or should the standards be set by each individual state? What do you believe the standards should be for measuring the effectiveness of legal counsel in death penalty cases?
https://capitalpunishmentincontext.org/cases/graham%20

The Supreme Court has ruled that death penalty defendants must be represented by
Scroll to top