October Term 2002 · Docket 01-1559
Should ineffective counsel claims wait for collateral review?
The dispute centers on whether courts should resolve ineffective assistance claims during direct appeal or wait for collateral review.
Verified source milestones
- — 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.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. Fahringer represented the side that brought the case during the oral argument.
Mr. Srinivasan argued that collateral review suits most ineffective assistance claims.
The Solicitor General's Office supported the government's procedural preference.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 11-41 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 11-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-39 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 41, lines 39-41 — Transcript, file page 41, lines 39-41
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
This case tests the proper timing for resolving claims that a lawyer failed to provide effective representation.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 11-41 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 11-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-39 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-39
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on February 25, 2003.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-15
What each side wants
the side that brought the case wants to resolve ineffective counsel claims during the direct appeal process.
The government wants to resolve these claims during collateral review proceedings.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 11-41 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 11-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-39 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-39
What each side says
the side that brought the case argues that direct appeal offers the best forum for these claims.
The government argues that collateral review better resolves most ineffective assistance claims.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 11-41 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 11-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-39 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-39
What the justices asked
Chief Justice Rehnquist asked the advocate to conclude the argument.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 41, lines 39-41 — Transcript, file page 41, lines 39-41
Why it matters
This issue determines when defendants can challenge their lawyer's performance. It affects the speed and scope of post-conviction remedies. It shapes the procedural path for correcting legal errors.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 11-41 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 11-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-39 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-39
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 Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 41, lines 39-41 — Transcript, file page 41, lines 39-41
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 11-41 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 11-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-39 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 11-41 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 11-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-39 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-39
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.