Strickland v. Washington
E237785
Strickland v. Washington is a landmark 1984 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the two-pronged test for determining when a criminal defendant’s right to effective assistance of counsel has been violated.
All labels observed (2)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Strickland v. Washington canonical | 2 |
| Strickland two-pronged test | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T2128604 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Strickland v. Washington Context triple: [Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution, interpretedByCase, Strickland v. Washington]
-
A.
Gideon v. Wainwright
Gideon v. Wainwright is a landmark 1963 U.S. Supreme Court decision that guaranteed the right to court-appointed counsel for criminal defendants who cannot afford an attorney.
-
B.
Duncan v. Louisiana
Duncan v. Louisiana is a 1968 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial in criminal cases applies to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.
-
C.
Powell v. Alabama
Powell v. Alabama is a landmark 1932 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held in capital cases the Due Process Clause requires defendants be given access to effective legal counsel, especially when they are young, illiterate, or otherwise disadvantaged.
-
D.
Glossip v. Gross
Glossip v. Gross is a 2015 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the use of a particular lethal injection drug protocol in executions against Eighth Amendment challenges.
-
E.
Betts v. Brady
Betts v. Brady was a 1942 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held indigent defendants in state criminal cases were not automatically entitled to court-appointed counsel, a rule later overturned by Gideon v. Wainwright.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NED2
Entity disambiguation (via description)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Strickland v. Washington Target entity description: Strickland v. Washington is a landmark 1984 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the two-pronged test for determining when a criminal defendant’s right to effective assistance of counsel has been violated.
-
A.
Gideon v. Wainwright
Gideon v. Wainwright is a landmark 1963 U.S. Supreme Court decision that guaranteed the right to court-appointed counsel for criminal defendants who cannot afford an attorney.
-
B.
Duncan v. Louisiana
Duncan v. Louisiana is a 1968 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial in criminal cases applies to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.
-
C.
Powell v. Alabama
Powell v. Alabama is a landmark 1932 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held in capital cases the Due Process Clause requires defendants be given access to effective legal counsel, especially when they are young, illiterate, or otherwise disadvantaged.
-
D.
Glossip v. Gross
Glossip v. Gross is a 2015 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the use of a particular lethal injection drug protocol in executions against Eighth Amendment challenges.
-
E.
Betts v. Brady
Betts v. Brady was a 1942 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held indigent defendants in state criminal cases were not automatically entitled to court-appointed counsel, a rule later overturned by Gideon v. Wainwright.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (53)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
Sixth Amendment case
ⓘ
United States Supreme Court case ⓘ criminal procedure case ⓘ landmark case ⓘ |
| appliesTo |
criminal defendants
ⓘ
federal criminal proceedings ⓘ state criminal proceedings ⓘ |
| arguedDate | 1983-01-10 ⓘ |
| caseType | habeas corpus ⓘ |
| citation | 466 U.S. 668 ⓘ |
| concurrenceBy |
John Paul Stevens
ⓘ
Thurgood Marshall ⓘ William J. Brennan Jr. ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvisionInterpreted |
U.S. Constitution, Sixth Amendment
ⓘ
surface form:
Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution
|
| country |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 1984-05-14 ⓘ |
| deficientPerformanceStandard | counsel’s representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness ⓘ |
| docketNumber | 82-1554 ⓘ |
| fullName | Strickland v. Washington self-link ⓘ |
| holding | To establish ineffective assistance of counsel, a defendant must show deficient performance and resulting prejudice. ⓘ |
| impact | established dominant federal standard for ineffective assistance of counsel ⓘ |
| joinedByInMajority |
Byron R. White
ⓘ
Harry A. Blackmun ⓘ John Paul Stevens ⓘ Lewis F. Powell Jr. ⓘ Thurgood Marshall ⓘ Warren E. Burger ⓘ William H. Rehnquist ⓘ William J. Brennan Jr. ⓘ |
| jurisdiction | Florida ⓘ |
| legalIssue |
Sixth Amendment right to counsel
ⓘ
effective assistance of counsel ⓘ ineffective assistance of counsel standard ⓘ |
| legalTestEstablished |
Strickland v. Washington
self-linksurface differs
ⓘ
surface form:
Strickland two-pronged test
|
| majorityOpinionBy | Sandra Day O’Connor ⓘ |
| originatingCourt | United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida ⓘ |
| page | 668 ⓘ |
| petitioner | David Leroy Washington ⓘ |
| prejudiceStandard | reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different ⓘ |
| prongOfTest |
deficient performance by counsel
ⓘ
prejudice to the defense ⓘ |
| rearguedDate | 1983-09-28 ⓘ |
| relatedCase |
Gideon v. Wainwright
ⓘ
United States v. Cronic ⓘ |
| relatedDoctrine | objective standard of reasonableness for counsel performance ⓘ |
| reporter | United States Reports ⓘ |
| respondent | Louie L. Wainwright NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| respondentOffice | Secretary of the Florida Department of Corrections ⓘ |
| subjectMatter |
criminal defense lawyering standards
ⓘ
death penalty sentencing ⓘ |
| subsequentHistory | standard widely applied in ineffective assistance of counsel claims ⓘ |
| volume | 466 ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
Instruction
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Input
Subject: Strickland v. Washington Description of subject: Strickland v. Washington is a landmark 1984 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the two-pronged test for determining when a criminal defendant’s right to effective assistance of counsel has been violated.
Referenced by (3)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.
subject surface form:
Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution
Strickland v. Washington
→
legalTestEstablished
→
Strickland v. Washington
self-linksurface differs
ⓘ
this entity surface form:
Strickland two-pronged test