Wiggins v. Smith
A plain-English summary from Criminal Defense Resources™, a free resource for pro per/pro se defendants and their families.
- Court
- U.S. Supreme Court
- Decided
- Citation
- 539 U.S. 510 (2003)
What did the court decide?
The Court held that defense lawyers violated the Sixth Amendment right to effective counsel at a capital sentencing when they did not investigate the defendant's background beyond a presentence report and social services records. Their choice not to prepare a social history fell short of professional standards, and it prejudiced the defense.
Why does it matter?
This is a leading ruling on the defense duty to investigate mitigation evidence (a person's life history and background) before sentencing. It applies the Strickland test.
Where can I read the full opinion?
Read the full opinion on Cornell Law School LII →
Always read the full opinion and check whether later cases have limited or changed it. A summary can leave out important details.