Appealing a case based upon ineffective assistance of counsel

Appealing a case based upon ineffective assistance of counsel

A new appellate case opens an opportunity for people appealing their cases in Massachusetts.  People can now cite to the assigned counsel performance standards when arguing that they did not receive effective assistance at their trial. In Commonwealth v. Marinho, 464 Mass. 115 (2013), the defendant stated that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to advise him of the implications of an immigration conviction, explore plea resolutions and advocate for a lower sentence.  The Supreme Judicial Court looked to the Committee for Public Counsel criminal performance standards to determine  what is expected from an ordinary fallible lawyer.  The Supreme Judicial Court also looked at the American Bar Association's standards and the Massachusetts Rules of Professional Conduct.  The Supreme Judicial Court held that trial counsel's performance fell measurably below that of an ordinary fallible lawyer.  It nonetheless confirmed the defendant’s conviction because he was not prejudiced by counsel’s inadequate effectiveness.

*The above information is very general in nature and should not be considered or relied upon as legal or any other type of advice. If a reader has any legal problem immediately consult an attorney for specific legal advice. If a reader has a medical or psychological issue, immediately consult with a medical professional. See the disclaimer tab at the top of the page for more information.

Photo credit