Legal Opinion

United States v. Jones

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided March 16, 1992No. Crim. A. 91-00200PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM

KATZ, District Judge.

Following his conviction for distribution of a controlled substance, the defendant filed a pro se motion for appointment of substitute counsel. In that motion, the defendant alleged that he had received ineffective assistance of counsel at trial. The request for appointment of substitute counsel was granted. The court has held an evidentiary hearing.

To establish a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, the defendant must show that counsel’s performance was deficient and that the deficient performance prejudiced the defense. The standard is that “counsel’s…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. United States v. MarionSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  3. United States v. LovascoSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  4. United States v. Murad NersesianCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1987
  5. Francis Ordean Reese v. Thomas A. FulcomerCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1991

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Levan v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2001
  2. Carpenter v. VaughnDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1995
  3. United States v. CouchDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 1993
  4. KANU v. KAUFFMANDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2020
  5. United States v. Jones (Bernard G.)Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1992

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API