13-b-2 Standards and Tests for Claims of Violations
Library | A Jailhouse Lawyer's Manual (2020 Edition) |
13-B-2. Standards and Tests for Claims of Violations
Once you have found at least one possible violation that you think occurred, you will need to identify the standard the court will use to determine whether or not that violation happened. A standard is a rule or a test that sets out the requirements a defendant must meet in order to prove to the court that a violation occurred. Most courts use a standard that is "well-established," and some may have multiple standards.23
After you have identified the applicable standard, you will need to show the court that this standard was met in your case in order to convince the court that a violation of your rights occurred. You do this by demonstrating to the court that the facts of your case match the requirements set out in the standard. This Section will explain how you find the standard and how to show the court that the violation in your case meets the standard.
After you have proven that the standard was met (that is, that you have suffered a violation), you will still need to show that the violation harmed you. To show harm, you will need to convince the court that the violation may have negatively affected the outcome of your trial (discussed in Part B(3) of this Chapter). Also, if you are a state prisoner, you will need to show that the state court was incorrect in failing to find that the violation occurred. If the state court ruled there was a violation but it did not harm you, you will need to show that its finding of "no harm" was unreasonable or contrary to federal law (discussed in Part B(4) of this Chapter).
(a) Finding the Standard the Court Uses for Your Violation
To find the standard the court will use to judge your claim, you have to look at past cases in which a habeas petitioner raised the same claim. If you are complaining about a violation from the list in Appendix C, you should check the cases that appear in the relevant footnotes. When you read these cases, you will be able to get an idea of the test the court will use to judge whether a violation has occurred in your case. The court will usually say something like: "To prove a violation, the court should look to the following," "To prove a violation has occurred, the petitioner needs to satisfy the following requirements," or "In order to show the right was violated, petitioner has to meet the following test." This exact language does not appear in every case, but it gives you an idea of the language for which to look to find the standard. Once you find the test used by the courts for the claim you are making, your next step is to figure out if there is any way to argue that your claim meets the test.
Here is one example of a violation and its standard. At your trial, you have a constitutional right to an effective attorney. If you had a bad trial lawyer, you might have a claim that he or she did not represent you effectively at trial. This claim is called an "ineffective assistance of counsel" claim, and it argues a violation of the Sixth Amendment. The case Strickland v. Washington sets out the standard for this type of violation.24 In Strickland, the court established a two-part test (now called the Strickland test) to determine whether your right to effective counsel was violated.
Under the first part, a court evaluates whether your lawyer's representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness by considering all the circumstances under prevailing (current) professional norms.25 This means that the court will determine the reasonableness of what you are claiming that your attorney did, or failed to do, while representing you.26
Under the second part of the Strickland test, the court will determine whether you were prejudiced as a result of your lawyer's unreasonable representation.27Prejudice is an important concept in habeas. It means that there is a "reasonable probability"28 that...
To continue reading
Request your trial