Cronic standard in Tennessee

8 Tennessee opinions name it 2 courts 2003–2020 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Tennessee 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 (6)

Case	Followed	Cited
Dellinger v. Stategreen tenn · 2009 · cited in 1 Tennessee opinions naming this issue, 2011–2011 2 sentences 2011T.C.A. § 40- 30-110(f) (2010); see also Dellinger v. State, 279 S.W.3d 282, 293-94 (Tenn. 2009). 2011T.C.A. § 40- 30-110(f) (2010); see also Dellinger v. State, 279 S.W.3d 282, 293-94 (Tenn. 2009).	1	1
United States v. Cronicgreen scotus · 1984 · cited in 1 Tennessee opinions naming this issue, 2003–2003 2 sentences 2003In United States v. -44- Cronic, 466 U.S. 648, 658 , 104 S. Ct. 2039, 2046 (1984), the Supreme Court fashioned an exception to the Strickland prejudice prong reasoning that “there are circumstances that are so likely to prejudice the accused that the cost of litigating their effect in a particular case is unjustified.” The Cronic court, actually in dicta, stated that in rare circumstances, prejudice might be presumed “without inquiry into counsel’s actual performance at trial.” Id. at 662 , 104 S. Ct. at 2048. 2003In United States v. -44- Cronic, 466 U.S. 648, 658 , 104 S. Ct. 2039, 2046 (1984), the Supreme Court fashioned an exception to the Strickland prejudice prong reasoning that “there are circumstances that are so likely to prejudice the accused that the cost of litigating their effect in a particular case is unjustified.” The Cronic court, actually in dicta, stated that in rare circumstances, prejudice might be presumed “without inquiry into counsel’s actual performance at trial.” Id. at 662 , 104 S. Ct. at 2048.	1	1
Nazzaro Scarpa v. Larry E. Dubois, Etc.green ca1 · 1994 · cited in 1 Tennessee opinions naming this issue, 2003–2003 2 sentences 2003Nonetheless, the Cronic exception may only be employed “if the record reveals presumptively prejudicial circumstances, such as an outright denial of counsel, a denial of the right to effective cross-examination, or a complete failure to subject the prosecution’s case to adversarial testing.” Scarpa v. Dubois, 38 F.3d 1, 12 (1st Cir. 1994) (footnote omitted). 2003Nonetheless, the Cronic exception may only be employed “if the record reveals presumptively prejudicial circumstances, such as an outright denial of counsel, a denial of the right to effective cross-examination, or a complete failure to subject the prosecution’s case to adversarial testing.” Scarpa v. Dubois, 38 F.3d 1, 12 (1st Cir. 1994) (footnote omitted).	1	1
Pamela D. Green, Cross-Appellant v. Dorothy J. Arn, Cross-Appelleegreen ca6 · 1987 · cited in 1 Tennessee opinions naming this issue, 2003–2003 2 sentences 2003See, e.g., United States v. Mateo, 950 F.2d 44, 48-50 (1st Cir. 1991) (attorney failed to appear); Tucker v. Day, 969 F.2d 155, 159 (5th Cir. 1992) (defense counsel sat mute throughout entire resentencing proceeding); Green v. Arn, 809 F.2d 1257, 1259-64 (6th Cir. 1987), vacated, 484 U.S. 806 , 108 S. Ct. 52 (1987), reinstated, 839 F.2d 300 (1988), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 1034 , 109 S. Ct. 847 (1989) (defense counsel absent from courtroom during critical stage of trial). 2003See, e.g., United States v. Mateo, 950 F.2d 44, 48-50 (1st Cir. 1991) (attorney failed to appear); Tucker v. Day, 969 F.2d 155, 159 (5th Cir. 1992) (defense counsel sat mute throughout entire resentencing proceeding); Green v. Arn, 809 F.2d 1257, 1259-64 (6th Cir. 1987), vacated, 484 U.S. 806 , 108 S. Ct. 52 (1987), reinstated, 839 F.2d 300 (1988), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 1034 , 109 S. Ct. 847 (1989) (defense counsel absent from courtroom during critical stage of trial).	1	1
United States v. David Mateogreen ca1 · 1991 · cited in 1 Tennessee opinions naming this issue, 2003–2003 2 sentences 2003See, e.g., United States v. Mateo, 950 F.2d 44, 48-50 (1st Cir. 1991) (attorney failed to appear); Tucker v. Day, 969 F.2d 155, 159 (5th Cir. 1992) (defense counsel sat mute throughout entire resentencing proceeding); Green v. Arn, 809 F.2d 1257, 1259-64 (6th Cir. 1987), vacated, 484 U.S. 806 , 108 S. Ct. 52 (1987), reinstated, 839 F.2d 300 (1988), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 1034 , 109 S. Ct. 847 (1989) (defense counsel absent from courtroom during critical stage of trial). 2003See, e.g., United States v. Mateo, 950 F.2d 44, 48-50 (1st Cir. 1991) (attorney failed to appear); Tucker v. Day, 969 F.2d 155, 159 (5th Cir. 1992) (defense counsel sat mute throughout entire resentencing proceeding); Green v. Arn, 809 F.2d 1257, 1259-64 (6th Cir. 1987), vacated, 484 U.S. 806 , 108 S. Ct. 52 (1987), reinstated, 839 F.2d 300 (1988), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 1034 , 109 S. Ct. 847 (1989) (defense counsel absent from courtroom during critical stage of trial).	1	1
Raymond Alton Tucker v. Ed Day, Wardengreen ca5 · 1992 · cited in 1 Tennessee opinions naming this issue, 2003–2003 2 sentences 2003See, e.g., United States v. Mateo, 950 F.2d 44, 48-50 (1st Cir. 1991) (attorney failed to appear); Tucker v. Day, 969 F.2d 155, 159 (5th Cir. 1992) (defense counsel sat mute throughout entire resentencing proceeding); Green v. Arn, 809 F.2d 1257, 1259-64 (6th Cir. 1987), vacated, 484 U.S. 806 , 108 S. Ct. 52 (1987), reinstated, 839 F.2d 300 (1988), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 1034 , 109 S. Ct. 847 (1989) (defense counsel absent from courtroom during critical stage of trial). 2003See, e.g., United States v. Mateo, 950 F.2d 44, 48-50 (1st Cir. 1991) (attorney failed to appear); Tucker v. Day, 969 F.2d 155, 159 (5th Cir. 1992) (defense counsel sat mute throughout entire resentencing proceeding); Green v. Arn, 809 F.2d 1257, 1259-64 (6th Cir. 1987), vacated, 484 U.S. 806 , 108 S. Ct. 52 (1987), reinstated, 839 F.2d 300 (1988), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 1034 , 109 S. Ct. 847 (1989) (defense counsel absent from courtroom during critical stage of trial).	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Tennessee. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (9)

Case	Cited	Years
Bell v. Cone green scotus · 2002 2 sentences 2020In another particularly relevant United States Supreme Court opinion, Bell v. Cone, 535 U.S. 685 (2002), the Court again discussed the Cronic standard and when it should apply. 2020In another particularly relevant United States Supreme Court opinion, Bell v. Cone, 535 U.S. 685 (2002), the Court again discussed the Cronic standard and when it should apply.	5	2003–2020
Roe v. Flores-Ortega green scotus · 2000 2 sentences 2020Flores-Ortega, 528 U.S. at 483 . 2020Flores-Ortega, 528 U.S. at 483 .	3	2019–2020
Wallace v. State green tenn · 2003 2 sentences 2019Citing to Wallace v. State, 121 S.W.3d 652 (Tenn. 2003), the State submits that “[i]n the motion for new trial context, the Cronic standard applies to a complete failure to file such a motion.” The State continues, -33- But prejudice is only presumed from counsel’s failure to file a motion when it waives all non-sufficiency issues on appeal. [Wallace, 121 S.W.3d] at 659. 2019Citing to Wallace v. State, 121 S.W.3d 652 (Tenn. 2003), the State submits that “[i]n the motion for new trial context, the Cronic standard applies to a complete failure to file such a motion.” The State continues, -33- But prejudice is only presumed from counsel’s failure to file a motion when it waives all non-sufficiency issues on appeal. [Wallace, 121 S.W.3d] at 659.	1	2019–2019
Powell v. Alabama green scotus · 1932 1 sentence 2013The State responds by arguing, inter alia, that a finding of presumed prejudice under the third Cronic category is appropriate only in very rare, egregious circumstances, such as those present in Powell v. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45 (1932), which is the only case where the United States Supreme Court has found a presumption of prejudice warranted under the third Cronic category.	1	2013–2013
Pamela D. Green, Cross-Appellant v. Dorothy J. Arn, Cross-Appellee green ca6 · 1988 2 sentences 2003See, e.g., United States v. Mateo, 950 F.2d 44, 48-50 (1st Cir. 1991) (attorney failed to appear); Tucker v. Day, 969 F.2d 155, 159 (5th Cir. 1992) (defense counsel sat mute throughout entire resentencing proceeding); Green v. Arn, 809 F.2d 1257, 1259-64 (6th Cir. 1987), vacated, 484 U.S. 806 , 108 S. Ct. 52 (1987), reinstated, 839 F.2d 300 (1988), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 1034 , 109 S. Ct. 847 (1989) (defense counsel absent from courtroom during critical stage of trial). 2003See, e.g., United States v. Mateo, 950 F.2d 44, 48-50 (1st Cir. 1991) (attorney failed to appear); Tucker v. Day, 969 F.2d 155, 159 (5th Cir. 1992) (defense counsel sat mute throughout entire resentencing proceeding); Green v. Arn, 809 F.2d 1257, 1259-64 (6th Cir. 1987), vacated, 484 U.S. 806 , 108 S. Ct. 52 (1987), reinstated, 839 F.2d 300 (1988), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 1034 , 109 S. Ct. 847 (1989) (defense counsel absent from courtroom during critical stage of trial).	1	2003–2003
Illinois v. Duncan green scotus · 1987 2 sentences 2003See, e.g., United States v. Mateo, 950 F.2d 44, 48-50 (1st Cir. 1991) (attorney failed to appear); Tucker v. Day, 969 F.2d 155, 159 (5th Cir. 1992) (defense counsel sat mute throughout entire resentencing proceeding); Green v. Arn, 809 F.2d 1257, 1259-64 (6th Cir. 1987), vacated, 484 U.S. 806 , 108 S. Ct. 52 (1987), reinstated, 839 F.2d 300 (1988), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 1034 , 109 S. Ct. 847 (1989) (defense counsel absent from courtroom during critical stage of trial). 2003See, e.g., United States v. Mateo, 950 F.2d 44, 48-50 (1st Cir. 1991) (attorney failed to appear); Tucker v. Day, 969 F.2d 155, 159 (5th Cir. 1992) (defense counsel sat mute throughout entire resentencing proceeding); Green v. Arn, 809 F.2d 1257, 1259-64 (6th Cir. 1987), vacated, 484 U.S. 806 , 108 S. Ct. 52 (1987), reinstated, 839 F.2d 300 (1988), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 1034 , 109 S. Ct. 847 (1989) (defense counsel absent from courtroom during critical stage of trial).	1	2003–2003
Arn v. Green green scotus · 1987 2 sentences 2003See, e.g., United States v. Mateo, 950 F.2d 44, 48-50 (1st Cir. 1991) (attorney failed to appear); Tucker v. Day, 969 F.2d 155, 159 (5th Cir. 1992) (defense counsel sat mute throughout entire resentencing proceeding); Green v. Arn, 809 F.2d 1257, 1259-64 (6th Cir. 1987), vacated, 484 U.S. 806 , 108 S. Ct. 52 (1987), reinstated, 839 F.2d 300 (1988), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 1034 , 109 S. Ct. 847 (1989) (defense counsel absent from courtroom during critical stage of trial). 2003See, e.g., United States v. Mateo, 950 F.2d 44, 48-50 (1st Cir. 1991) (attorney failed to appear); Tucker v. Day, 969 F.2d 155, 159 (5th Cir. 1992) (defense counsel sat mute throughout entire resentencing proceeding); Green v. Arn, 809 F.2d 1257, 1259-64 (6th Cir. 1987), vacated, 484 U.S. 806 , 108 S. Ct. 52 (1987), reinstated, 839 F.2d 300 (1988), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 1034 , 109 S. Ct. 847 (1989) (defense counsel absent from courtroom during critical stage of trial).	1	2003–2003
Connecticut v. Plourde green scotus · 1989 2 sentences 2003See, e.g., United States v. Mateo, 950 F.2d 44, 48-50 (1st Cir. 1991) (attorney failed to appear); Tucker v. Day, 969 F.2d 155, 159 (5th Cir. 1992) (defense counsel sat mute throughout entire resentencing proceeding); Green v. Arn, 809 F.2d 1257, 1259-64 (6th Cir. 1987), vacated, 484 U.S. 806 , 108 S. Ct. 52 (1987), reinstated, 839 F.2d 300 (1988), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 1034 , 109 S. Ct. 847 (1989) (defense counsel absent from courtroom during critical stage of trial). 2003See, e.g., United States v. Mateo, 950 F.2d 44, 48-50 (1st Cir. 1991) (attorney failed to appear); Tucker v. Day, 969 F.2d 155, 159 (5th Cir. 1992) (defense counsel sat mute throughout entire resentencing proceeding); Green v. Arn, 809 F.2d 1257, 1259-64 (6th Cir. 1987), vacated, 484 U.S. 806 , 108 S. Ct. 52 (1987), reinstated, 839 F.2d 300 (1988), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 1034 , 109 S. Ct. 847 (1989) (defense counsel absent from courtroom during critical stage of trial).	1	2003–2003
California v. Radke green scotus · 1989 2 sentences 2003See, e.g., United States v. Mateo, 950 F.2d 44, 48-50 (1st Cir. 1991) (attorney failed to appear); Tucker v. Day, 969 F.2d 155, 159 (5th Cir. 1992) (defense counsel sat mute throughout entire resentencing proceeding); Green v. Arn, 809 F.2d 1257, 1259-64 (6th Cir. 1987), vacated, 484 U.S. 806 , 108 S. Ct. 52 (1987), reinstated, 839 F.2d 300 (1988), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 1034 , 109 S. Ct. 847 (1989) (defense counsel absent from courtroom during critical stage of trial). 2003See, e.g., United States v. Mateo, 950 F.2d 44, 48-50 (1st Cir. 1991) (attorney failed to appear); Tucker v. Day, 969 F.2d 155, 159 (5th Cir. 1992) (defense counsel sat mute throughout entire resentencing proceeding); Green v. Arn, 809 F.2d 1257, 1259-64 (6th Cir. 1987), vacated, 484 U.S. 806 , 108 S. Ct. 52 (1987), reinstated, 839 F.2d 300 (1988), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 1034 , 109 S. Ct. 847 (1989) (defense counsel absent from courtroom during critical stage of trial).	1	2003–2003

Statutes the citing opinions construe

TN § Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-110 (5) TN § Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-103 (4) TN § Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-101 (3) TN § Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-113 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

IL 44 (1988–2026) TX 37 (2002–2025) PA 31 (2003–2025) MI 19 (2007–2026) KS 18 (2000–2025) IN 17 (1991–2018) CA 15 (1996–2025) FL 10 (2000–2017) ID 9 (2007–2024) TN 8 (2003–2020) MD 8 (2005–2025) NJ 8 (1987–2021) CT 7 (2015–2025) WI 7 (2007–2026) DE 7 (2019–2022) MS 6 (1999–2023) OH 5 (2017–2025) AZ 5 (1996–2024) LA 4 (2003–2016) GA 4 (2019–2026) AL 3 (2005–2026) MT 3 (2018–2026) WA 3 (2025–2026) ME 3 (2006–2021) DC 2 (2006–2007) NC 2 (2018–2026) SC 2 (2004–2011) WY 2 (2003–2005) CO 2 (2024–2025)

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