dc.contributor.author | King, Nancy J., 1958- | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2014-11-10T19:37:09Z | |
dc.date.available | 2014-11-10T19:37:09Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2013 | |
dc.identifier.citation | 122 Yale Law Journal 2428 (2013) | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/1803/6839 | |
dc.description | article published in law journal | en_US |
dc.description.abstract | 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. | en_US |
dc.format.extent | 1 PDF (32 pages) | en_US |
dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | |
dc.language.iso | en_US | en_US |
dc.publisher | Yale Law Journal | en_US |
dc.subject.lcsh | Right to counsel -- United States | en_US |
dc.subject.lcsh | Habeas corpus | en_US |
dc.subject.lcsh | Criminal procedure -- United States | en_US |
dc.title | Enforcing Effective Assistance After Martinez | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
dc.identifier.ssrn-uri | http://ssrn.com/abstract=2259635 | |