Harden v. State
Supreme Court of Delaware
1Opinion of the Court
STRINE, Chief Justice:
I
This petition for post-conviction relief argues that defendant Darius Harden suffered prejudice because his attorney did not represent him effectively at his sentencing hearing. Sentencing was a critical stage for Harden because he committed an awful crime of violence, and did so in front of the victim's five-year-old child. As originally charged, Harden faced potential convictions for Home Invasion, Assault Second Degree, Terroristic Threatening, Theft, Offensive Touching, and Endangering the Welfare of a Child. Eventually, he pled guilty to Assault Second Degree and…
Also in this document: Dissent.
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Brady v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Wiggins v. Smith, WardenSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- Padilla v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 2010
- Michel v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1956
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Urquhart v. StateSupreme Court of Delaware · 2019
- Brett Talmadge v. State of AlaskaCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2025
- State v. DavenportSuperior Court of Delaware · 2018
- State v. DillardSuperior Court of Delaware · 2019
- State v. DillardSuperior Court of Delaware · 2019
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.