United States v. Cronic

E821190

United States v. Cronic is a 1984 U.S. Supreme Court decision that, alongside Strickland v. Washington, defines when a criminal defendant’s right to effective assistance of counsel is presumed to be violated without needing to show specific prejudice.

Try in SPARQL Jump to: Statements Referenced by

Statements (47)

Predicate Object
instanceOf Sixth Amendment case
U.S. Supreme Court case
criminal procedure case
areaOfLaw criminal law
criminal procedure
arguedDate 1983-11-02
citation 466 U.S. 648
citedWith Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) NERFINISHED
clarified When prejudice is presumed in ineffective assistance of counsel claims.
constitutionalProvision Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution NERFINISHED
court Supreme Court of the United States
decisionDate 1984-05-14
defendantName Harrison P. Cronic NERFINISHED
distinguishedFrom Strickland v. Washington NERFINISHED
docketNumber 82-660
fullCaseName United States v. Cronic NERFINISHED
governmentParty United States of America NERFINISHED
holding The Court held that a presumption of prejudice arises only in limited circumstances where the accused is denied counsel at a critical stage, where counsel entirely fails to subject the prosecution's case to meaningful adversarial testing, or where the circumstances make it unlikely that any lawyer could provide effective assistance.
The Court rejected a per se rule that short preparation time or inexperience of counsel alone establishes a Sixth Amendment violation.
joinedByInMajority Chief Justice Warren E. Burger NERFINISHED
Justice Byron R. White NERFINISHED
Justice Harry A. Blackmun NERFINISHED
Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. NERFINISHED
Justice Sandra Day O'Connor NERFINISHED
Justice Thurgood Marshall NERFINISHED
Justice William H. Rehnquist NERFINISHED
Justice William J. Brennan Jr. NERFINISHED
jurisdiction United States federal courts NERFINISHED
keyPhrase entire failure to subject the prosecution's case to meaningful adversarial testing
keyPrinciple Not all attorney errors warrant a presumption of prejudice; most claims require showing actual prejudice under Strickland.
legalIssue presumption of prejudice
right to effective assistance of counsel
majorityOpinionBy Justice John Paul Stevens NERFINISHED
originatingCourt United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit NERFINISHED
page 648
petitioner United States NERFINISHED
precedentFor ineffective assistance of counsel doctrine
presumed prejudice in Sixth Amendment cases
rearguedDate 1984-01-09
relatedCase Strickland v. Washington NERFINISHED
reporter United States Reports
respondent Harrison P. Cronic NERFINISHED
result Judgment of the Court of Appeals vacated and case remanded.
standardEstablished Narrow categories in which ineffective assistance of counsel is presumed without a specific showing of prejudice.
subjectMatter federal mail fraud prosecution
volume 466
yearDecided 1984

Referenced by (1)

Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.

Strickland v. Washington relatedCase United States v. Cronic