State v. Turner
Supreme Court of Connecticut
1DissentSullivan, C. J.
The majority in the case presently before us concludes that, because reasonable jurists could not conclude that the defendant was in custody at the time of his interrogation, the failure of his attorney to apprise him of the opportunity to appeal if he entered a conditional plea of nolo contendere does not give rise to a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. I first conclude that the majority adopts an inappropriate standard for the evaluation of frivolous appeals. In addition, I believe that, even utilizing the standard that the majority adopts, reasonable jurists could disagree about…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Hill v. LockhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- In Re GAULTSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Oregon v. MathiasonSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Stansbury v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.