Enforcing Effective Assistance after Martinez
Nancy J. King
Vanderbilt University - Law School
May 2, 2013
The Yale Law Journal Company, Incorporated in The Yale Law Journal (Forthcoming)
Vanderbilt Public Law Research Paper No. 13-24
This Essay argues that the Court’s effort to expand habeas review of ineffective assistance of counsel claims in Martinez v. Ryan will make little difference in either the enforcement of the right to the effective assistance of counsel or the provision of competent representation in state criminal cases. Drawing upon statistics about habeas litigation and emerging case law, the Essay first explains why Martinez is not likely to lead to more federal habeas grants of relief. It then presents new empirical information about state postconviction review (cases filed, counsel, hearings, and relief rates), post-Martinez decisions, and anecdotal reports from the states to explain why, even if federal habeas grants increase, state courts and legislatures are unlikely to respond by invigorating state collateral review. The Essay concludes that alternative means, other than case-by-case postconviction review, will be needed to ensure the provision of effective assistance.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 32
Keywords: habeas, procedural default, Martinez, state post-conviction review, Gideon, Strickland, ineffective assistanceAccepted Paper Series
Date posted: May 4, 2013
© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo7 in 0.235 seconds