Pleas & Sentencing – Ineffective Assistance of Counsel

Listen to this article

7th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: Michael Miller v. Dushan Zatecky

Case No.: 15-1869

Officials: EASTERBROOK and SYKES, Circuit Judges, and ADELMAN, District Judge.

Focus: Pleas & Sentencing – Ineffective Assistance of Counsel    

Court did not err in imposition of sentence and attorney did not provide ineffective assistance of counsel and chances of success was effectively “zero”

“And why should a state be required, as a matter of either state or federal law, to give Miller the benefit of decisions released after the conclusion of his direct appeal? Miller does not question the state judiciary’s conclusion that, if his lawyer had contested the length of his sentence in 2004, he would have lost. The goal of ineffective-assistance doctrine is to give criminal defendants the benefit of the counsel to which the Sixth Amendment says they are entitled. We know from Indiana’s decision that, even if appellate counsel had done exactly what Miller says counsel should have done, this would not have helped him. It would be weird to say that a defendant is better off having a lawyer who omits a losing issue than if that lawyer had performed exactly as a zealous and capable counsel should.”

Affirmed

Full Text

Attorney Derek A. Hawkins is the managing partner at Hawkins Law Offices LLC, where he heads up the firm’s startup law practice. He specializes in business formation, corporate governance, intellectual property protection, private equity and venture capital funding and mergers & acquisitions. Check out the website at www.hawkins-lawoffices.com or contact them at 262-737-8825.