Effective Trial Counsel After Martinez v. Ryan: Focusing on the Adequacy of State Procedures (2013)

ABSTRACT & CITATION

This article contemplates the relationship between defendants’ right to effective trial counsel and states’ post-conviction procedural frameworks in the wake of the Supreme Court’s  ruling in Martinez v. Ryan.  The Martinez Court specifically held that a state prisoner who fails to properly raise an ineffective assistance of trial counsel claim in the first state collateral proceeding in which it could be raised may demonstrate cause to excuse his procedural default if he lacked effective state post-conviction counsel to help him raise the claim.  The author posits that states who try to adapt in order to avoid an  Martinez claim on behalf of a single defendant may open the door to a more systemic challenge based on underlying principle of equity in Martinez.  Thought-provoking and thorough, this article sheds light on a very complex area of the criminal justice system critical for both trial and appellate lawyers.

Primus, E. (2013). Effective Trial Counsel After Martinez v. Ryan: Focusing on the Adequacy of State Procedures. Yale Law Journal, 8 (2013), 2604- 2625.