SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT DIRK GKEINEDER - Mass Cases

Commonwealth v. Curnin, 409 Mass. 218, 222 n.7 (1991).
The admission of unreliable evidence may violate a
defendant's constitutional right to due proceas under the
Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments and Article XII. a,
e.q., Manson v. Brathwaite, 432 U.S. 38, 112 (1977);
Commonwealth v. Johnson, 420 Mass. 458, 461-463 (1995).
2. Ineffective aaaiBtance of
Every criminal defendant is guasanteed effective
assistance of counsel by the Sixth and Fourteenth
Amendments and Article XII. Stricklandv. Washinston, 466
U.S. 668 (1984) ; Commonwealth v. Martinez, 425 Mass. 382,
387 (1997) I Both the federal and state courts have
delineated a two-pronged test for determining whether a
constitutional violation of this right: has occurred. The
first prong is virtually identical - whether counsel's
performance was seriously deficient, measured against an
objective standard of reasonableness. Wiaqins v. Smith,
539 U.S. 510, 521 (2003); -, 366
Mass. 89, 96-99 (1974).
The prejudice prong has been enunciated slightly
differently by the federal and Massachusetts state
courts. Under federal law, the defendant must show that
there is a reasonable probability that but for counsel's
22
This summary of relevant law applies to all of
Greineder's ineffective assistance claims.
45