This article closely examines the Supreme Court's decision in Strickland v. Washington, as it applies to effective assistance of trial counsel. Part III analyzes the constitutional origin and current status of the right to effective assistance of counsel on appeal. Part IV discusses the functional differences between trial and appellate counsel, the differences in the two forums, and the different effect that a finding of ineffectiveness of counsel at trial or on appeal has on finality. Part V formulates a standard to govern ineffectiveness of appellate counsel claims that incorporates Strickland's “reasonable competence” standard, but applies that standard differently with respect to appellate counsel. It also rejects Strickland's prejudice requirement.
Lissa Griffin, The Right to Effective Assistance of Appellate Counsel, 97 W. Va. L. Rev. 1 (1994), http://digitalcommons.pace.edu/lawfaculty/474/.