October Term 2001 · Docket 00-9285

Does a lawyer conflict require proof of harm?

the sides that brought the case argue a conflict requires proof of harm. the opposing sides argue the Sixth Amendment is violated by the conflict itself.

Official caption
Mickens v. Taylor
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  2. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Mr. Wagner argued the opposing side relies on Holloway.

    Mr. Wagner stated Holloway presumes prejudice in specific scenarios.

    Mr. Gornstein argued the Sixth Amendment requires showing actual conflict.

    Mr. Gornstein stated adverse effect on performance is necessary for a violation.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

This case tests the standard for ineffective assistance claims. It asks if a lawyer conflict requires proof of harm.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on November 5, 2001.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

the sides that brought the case want the Court to require proof of harm.

the opposing sides want the Court to presume harm from the conflict.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

the sides that brought the case argue the Sixth Amendment requires showing actual conflict and adverse effect.

the opposing sides argue Holloway presumes prejudice when a court compels conflicted representation.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Chief Justice Rehnquist asked if the case is submitted.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This standard defines when a lawyer conflict violates constitutional rights. It determines the burden of proof for criminal defendants.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON