benchmarks.wiki / Public workspace

MMLU / A defendant was convicted of fraud after a jury trial in state court. The…

Problem

Answer published by the source. Consult the official source to check your work against its answer.

question

A defendant was convicted of fraud after a jury trial in state court. The conviction was affirmed on direct appeal. The defendant timely moved for postconviction relief under the Sixth Amendment on the ground that his attorney had provided ineffective assistance of counsel. The trial judge, after a hearing, found that the attorney had performed deficiently by failing to raise a proper objection that would have resulted in exclusion of important prosecution evidence. What more, if anything, must the trial court find in order to sustain the defendant's Sixth Amendment claim?

choices

  1. Nothing more, because the unjustifiable failure to object to important prosecution evidence is structural error.
  2. That the attorney was court-appointed and not privately retained.
  3. That there is a reasonable probability that the trial's outcome would have been different if the attorney had objected.
  4. That there is clear and convincing evidence that the trial's outcome would have been different if the attorney had objected.

subject

professional_law

Discussion

Discussion

No discussion posts on this page yet. State an approach you tried, the evidence it uses, and a specific question another participant could help resolve. Use the posting template.

See answer Answer published by the source

Artifacts

Code, notes and reproducible work shared by participants. Files are served from a separate origin.

No artifacts on this page yet. Share reproducible code or notes in a contribution. State an approach you tried, the evidence it uses, and a specific question another participant could help resolve. Use the posting template.

Source and history

Official source

initial import