Wiggins v. Smith, 539 U.S. 510 (2003), is a case in which the United States Supreme Court spelled out standards for "effectiveness" in the constitutional right to legal counsel guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment. Previously the court had determined that the Sixth Amendment included the right to "effective assistance" of legal counsel, but it did not specify what constitutes "effective", thus leaving the standards for effectiveness vague. In Wiggins v. Smith, the court set forth the American Bar Association Guidelines for the Appointment and Performance of Defense Counsel in Death Penalty Cases Guideline 11.8.6.(1989), as a specific guideline by which to measure effectiveness and competence of legal counsel.

Property Value
dbo:abstract
  • Wiggins v. Smith, 539 U.S. 510 (2003), is a case in which the United States Supreme Court spelled out standards for "effectiveness" in the constitutional right to legal counsel guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment. Previously the court had determined that the Sixth Amendment included the right to "effective assistance" of legal counsel, but it did not specify what constitutes "effective", thus leaving the standards for effectiveness vague. In Wiggins v. Smith, the court set forth the American Bar Association Guidelines for the Appointment and Performance of Defense Counsel in Death Penalty Cases Guideline 11.8.6.(1989), as a specific guideline by which to measure effectiveness and competence of legal counsel. In Strickland v. Washington, the Supreme Court set forth the factors the defendant must establish to demonstrate that counsel was ineffective. First, it must be shown that counsel's performance fell below an objective standard of reasonable competence, and second, if counsel had not been competent, that the trial outcome would likely have been different had the counsel been competent. (en)
dbo:wikiPageEditLink
dbo:wikiPageExternalLink
dbo:wikiPageExtracted
  • 2019-12-19 02:42:30Z (xsd:date)
  • 2021-01-31 14:04:32Z (xsd:date)
  • 2021-02-02 15:54:33Z (xsd:date)
dbo:wikiPageHistoryLink
dbo:wikiPageID
  • 13684890 (xsd:integer)
dbo:wikiPageLength
  • 12689 (xsd:integer)
  • 12723 (xsd:integer)
  • 12737 (xsd:integer)
dbo:wikiPageModified
  • 2019-12-19 02:42:25Z (xsd:date)
  • 2021-01-31 14:04:28Z (xsd:date)
  • 2021-02-02 15:54:27Z (xsd:date)
dbo:wikiPageOutDegree
  • 41 (xsd:integer)
dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
  • 931473474 (xsd:integer)
  • 1003954968 (xsd:integer)
  • 1004434848 (xsd:integer)
dbo:wikiPageRevisionLink
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
dct:subject
rdf:type
rdfs:comment
  • Wiggins v. Smith, 539 U.S. 510 (2003), is a case in which the United States Supreme Court spelled out standards for "effectiveness" in the constitutional right to legal counsel guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment. Previously the court had determined that the Sixth Amendment included the right to "effective assistance" of legal counsel, but it did not specify what constitutes "effective", thus leaving the standards for effectiveness vague. In Wiggins v. Smith, the court set forth the American Bar Association Guidelines for the Appointment and Performance of Defense Counsel in Death Penalty Cases Guideline 11.8.6.(1989), as a specific guideline by which to measure effectiveness and competence of legal counsel. (en)
rdfs:label
  • Wiggins v. Smith (en)
owl:sameAs
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
foaf:name
  • Kevin Wiggins, Petitioner v. Sewall Smith, Warden, et al. (en)
  • (en)
is dbo:wikiPageDisambiguates of
is dbo:wikiPageRedirects of
is foaf:primaryTopic of