Skakel v. Comm'r of Corr.
Supreme Court of Connecticut
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partRobinson, J.
I agree with the majority's conclusion, in part II B of its opinion, that the habeas court improperly concluded that Michael Sherman, the attorney who represented the petitioner, Michael Skakel, at his criminal trial, rendered ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to raise a third-party culpability defense against Thomas Skakel. I also agree, however, with Justice Palmer's conclusion in part I of his comprehensive and thoughtful dissenting opinion that the habeas court properly concluded that Sherman rendered ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to locate and investigate the…
Also in this document: Dissent.
2Cases cited78 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Williams v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Harrington v. RichterSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
- Wiggins v. Smith, WardenSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- McMann v. RichardsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
73 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.