criminal proceeding error (Maryland) · Go Syfert
← Maryland issues

criminal proceeding error in Maryland

9 Maryland opinions name it 2 courts 1975–2020 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Maryland courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (1)

CaseFollowedCited
Strickland v. Washingtongreen
scotus · 1984 · cited in 8 Maryland opinions naming this issue, 1985–2020
2 sentences

2020“An error by counsel, even if professionally unreasonable, does not warrant setting aside the judgment of a criminal proceeding if the error had no effect on the judgment.” Strickland, 466 U.S. at 691 .

2018"An error by counsel, even if professionally unreasonable, does not warrant setting aside the judgment of a criminal proceeding if the error had no effect on the judgment." Id. at 691 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 . "[I]neffectiveness claims alleging a deficiency in attorney performance are subject to a general requirement that the defendant affirmatively prove prejudice," id. at 693 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , defined as "a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different." Id. at 694 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 .

18

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Maryland. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (4)

CaseCitedYears
State v. Gross green
mdctspecapp · 2000
2 sentences

2001With respect to the “prejudice component” of Strickland v. Washington’s two-pronged test, this Court observed in State v. Gross, 134 Md.App. at 554 , 760 A.2d 725 : Strickland v. Washington then carefully pointed out that even if an “error by counsel” is demonstrated, such an error, “even if professionally unreasonable, does not warrant setting aside the judgment of a criminal proceeding if the error had no effect on the judgment.” 466 U.S. at 691 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 .

2001With respect to the “prejudice component” of Strickland v. Washington’s two-pronged test, this Court observed in State v. Gross, 134 Md.App. at 554 , 760 A.2d 725 : Strickland v. Washington then carefully pointed out that even if an “error by counsel” is demonstrated, such an error, “even if professionally unreasonable, does not warrant setting aside the judgment of a criminal proceeding if the error had no effect on the judgment.” 466 U.S. at 691 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 .

12001–2001
Lang v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board neutral
pacommwct · 1985
1 sentence

1986Under the prejudice component, we quoted from Strickland, 466 U.S. at 691-92 , 104 S.Ct. at 2067 , that “ ‘An error by counsel, even if professionally unreasonable, does not warrant setting aside the judgment of a criminal proceeding if the error had no effect on the judgment---[A]ny deficiencies in counsel’s performance must be prejudicial to the defense in order to constitute ineffective assistance under the Constitution.’ ” Harris, 303 Md. at 699 , 496 A.2d 107 .

11986–1986
Harris v. State green
md · 1985
1 sentence

1986Under the prejudice component, we quoted from Strickland, 466 U.S. at 691-92 , 104 S.Ct. at 2067 , that “ ‘An error by counsel, even if professionally unreasonable, does not warrant setting aside the judgment of a criminal proceeding if the error had no effect on the judgment---[A]ny deficiencies in counsel’s performance must be prejudicial to the defense in order to constitute ineffective assistance under the Constitution.’ ” Harris, 303 Md. at 699 , 496 A.2d 107 .

11986–1986
Stackhouse v. State green
mdctspecapp · 1967
1 sentence

1975Stackhouse v. State, 1 Md.

11975–1975

Where else courts name it

OH 214 (1989–2026) TN 59 (1999–2022) IL 59 (1977–2026) TX 23 (1984–2022) GA 21 (1962–2022) AL 19 (1984–2013) UT 19 (2007–2026) NJ 19 (1952–2025) LA 18 (1986–2025) NY 16 (1957–2024) MO 12 (1989–2021) MI 11 (1973–2026) WA 10 (1994–2024) MD 9 (1975–2020) CT 8 (1991–2024) FL 8 (1978–2009) PA 7 (1974–2016) CA 7 (1975–2025) VA 6 (1988–2014) IA 6 (1985–2017) ID 6 (1992–2024) SD 5 (1988–2023) WV 5 (2010–2021) WI 4 (1994–2019) OR 4 (1985–2001) MT 4 (2001–2019) KY 4 (2008–2025) CO 4 (1981–2025) SC 4 (2010–2016) DE 4 (2011–2021) NE 3 (1984–1995) MS 3 (1986–2001) OK 2 (1984–2006) AZ 2 (1984–1984) DC 2 (2001–2004) MA 2 (1992–2014) ME 2 (1997–2001) NV 2 (1993–1996) RI 2 (1993–2010)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check