Hurrell-Harring v. State of New York
New York Court of Appeals
930 N.E.2d 217 (2010)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Hurrell-Harring, et al. (plaintiffs) were similarly situated, indigent defendants in various criminal proceedings in New York. The plaintiffs brought a class action lawsuit against the State of New York (defendant), seeking a declaratory ruling that the state’s system of providing counsel for indigent defendants violated those defendants’ Sixth Amendment right to effective counsel. Specifically, the plaintiffs claimed the following: criminal defendants often went unrepresented during arraignments; if and when attorneys were appointed, they were often unavailable or unresponsive; appointed attorneys often missed court appearances or were not prepared for the appearance; and appointed attorneys often waived important rights without consulting the defendants. The lower court granted the state’s motion to dismiss on the grounds that ineffective assistance of counsel claims are case-specific under Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984), so the plaintiffs’ claim of systematic deficiencies was not cognizable. The plaintiffs appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Lippman, C.J.)
Dissent (Pigott, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 777,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
