Weaver v. Massachusetts
Issues
Can a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel resulting in a structural error in the lower court be reviewed using the harmless error standard, or should prejudice be presumed?
This case will address the burden on the defendant who is asserting an ineffective assistance of counsel claim upon appeal. Kentel Myrone Weaver argues that proving that his counsel failed to object to a courtroom closure during the jury selection proceedings with no strategic considerations should merit a dismissal of the underlying conviction. The state of Massachusetts maintains that this was a harmless error and therefore the conviction should stand. The Supreme Court’s decision will have implications for the scope of protections for the right to effective assistance of counsel.
Questions as Framed for the Court by the Parties
Whether a defendant who demonstrates that his lawyer’s deficient performance resulted in structural error must show actual prejudice to obtain a new trial under Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984).
In 2006, sixteen-year-old Kentel Myrone Weaver was convicted of the first-degree murder of fifteen-year-old Germaine Rucker and sentenced to life imprisonment. See Commonwealth v. Weaver, SJC no. 10932, slip op.
Written by
Edited by
Additional Resources
- Zack Huffman, High Court to Dissect Killer Teen's Confession, Courthouse News (Jan. 18,
2017). - Chau Ngyuen, Jury Convicts Defendant, 18, in Murder of 15-Year-Old, Boston Police Department News (Apr. 26, 2006).