United States v. Cronic (1983)
- Docket
- 82-660
- Decided
- 1983-01-01
Summary
Question: Must there be proof of specific errors on the part of counsel in order to show a violation of the Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel? Conclusion: Yes. Justice John Paul Stevens delivered the unanimous opinion. The Court held that the Court of Appeals erred by inferring that the less-than-ideal circumstances leading up to the trial negatively influenced the lawyer’s performance. The Sixth Amendment protects the right for an accused to receive effective assistance of counsel in order to protect the adversary process. Therefore, the test to determine whether a violation of the Sixth Amendment occurred must rely on evidence that the adversary process itself suffered. In this case, there was no evidence of specific instances of failure of counsel during trial. Also, the circumstances prior to the trial were not such that effective assistance would have been impossible. Justice Thurgood Marshall concurred in the judgment.