InsideGov
Supreme Court · Decisions

United States v. Cronic

The court held that a finding of prejudice in ineffective assistance of counsel claims cannot be based entirely on an inference.

466 U.S. 648 · No. 82-660 · 1983 term · Burger Court

Decided May 14, 1984 · argued Jan 10, 1984

Criminal procedure · Right to counsel

Majority opinion: John Stevens

The voteMajority

9–09 in the majority, 0 in dissent

No dissent (9–0)

Reversed and remanded. United States won.

What this ruling means

Reversed and remanded: the Supreme Court overturned the decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit and sent the case back to that court for further proceedings that follow the Supreme Court’s ruling.

United States was the petitioner, the side that asked the Supreme Court to review the case. “Won” means the Court gave that side the result it asked for.

From the Supreme Court Database. A justice who agreed with the result but not the reasoning counts in the majority.

Report a correction

Summary

The opening of the case’s Wikipedia article: what the case was about and what the Court held.

United States v. Cronic, 466 U.S. 648 (1984), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that a finding of prejudice in ineffective assistance of counsel claims cannot be based entirely on an inference. The defendant must satisfy the test from Strickland v. Washington by showing actual errors their attorney made and demonstrate that those errors affected the outcome of their trial.

Read the full article on Wikipedia

Data notes

The text is Wikipedia’s (CC BY-SA 4.0), matched to the case by its citation, docket number or name and year, and is not checked against the opinion. The site keeps the article’s opening section, ending on its last full sentence. The one-sentence summary under the title is the Decisions list’s: Wikipedia’s own ruling sentence, or, tagged “AI-written”, one Claude wrote from this opening.

Report a correction

How the justices voted

Each justice who took part, placed by their Martin–Quinn ideology score for the 1983 term. Filled: the 9 in the majority. Hollow: the 0 in dissent. Colour is the party of the president who appointed them.

More liberalMore conservativeMedianMarshallBrennanStevensBlackmunWhitePowellO'ConnorBurgerRehnquist

Majority(9)

Dissent(0)

  • None.
Data notes

Each justice’s vote and what they wrote are from the justice-centered file of the Supreme Court Database. “Wrote a concurrence” means the justice sided with the majority and wrote separately; a justice who dissented in part is counted on the side they took overall. A justice who wrote nothing is listed as joining their side.

Positions are each justice’s Martin–Quinn score for the case’s term, the same scores as the Ideology page: negative is more liberal, positive more conservative. A score sums up a justice’s votes across the whole term, so it says where they usually sit, not why they voted as they did here. The median line is the Court’s median justice that term.

Report a correction

The parties

Who brought the case to the Court, who answered it, and how it got there.

Petitioner
United StatesUnited States
Respondent
CronicPerson accused, indicted, or suspected of crime
Reached the Court by
Certiorari (the Court chose to hear it)
Data notes

The names are the two sides of the case’s title. The description under each is the Supreme Court Database’s category for that party, in its own wording. The petitioner is the side that asked the Supreme Court to review the decision below. “Why it was taken” appears only when the majority opinion says lower courts disagreed or were unsure about the question; reasons that would fit any case (“to resolve the question presented”, “an important question”) are left out.

Report a correction

The law at issue

The law the Court was asked to apply, and the kind of power it used to decide.

Provision
Sixth Amendment (right to counsel)
Kind of law
Constitutional Amendment
Decided by
Judicial review (national level)
Data notes

The Supreme Court Database codes the main constitutional provision, statute or court rule each case turned on, and the basis of the decision: judicial review of a federal or state law, interpreting a statute, supervising the lower courts, and so on. A case can rest on more than one. “Overruled” counts only where the majority opinion says so.

Report a correction

Timeline

What happened at the Court and how the case got there, newest first.

  1. May 14, 1984DecidedDecided · Decided 9–0: reversed and remanded. United States won.
  2. Jan 10, 1984ArguedArgued · Oral argument before the Court.
  3. Not datedTaken upTaken up · The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case (certiorari).
  4. Not datedCourt belowCourt below · Decided by the U.S. Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit: reversed.
  5. Not datedBeganBegan · The case began in the Oklahoma Western U.S. District Court.
Data notes

From the Supreme Court Database: the court the case began in, the court whose decision the Supreme Court reviewed and what that court did, how the case came to the Court, and the dates of argument and decision. The database does not date the steps in the lower courts. Court names are the database’s.

Report a correction

Other decisions on the same issue

93 other argued cases since 1946 on right to counsel, newest first.

  1. Villarreal v. Texas607 U.S. 465Feb 25, 2026 · 607 U.S. 465Criminal procedure9–0Unanimous band

  2. Thornell v. Jones144 S. Ct. 1302May 30, 2024 · 144 S. Ct. 1302Criminal procedure6–36–3 band

  3. Garza v. Idaho139 S. Ct. 738Feb 27, 2019 · 139 S. Ct. 738Criminal procedure6–36–3 band

  4. McCoy v. Louisiana138 S. Ct. 1500May 14, 2018 · 138 S. Ct. 1500Criminal procedure6–36–3 band

  5. Lee v. United States137 S. Ct. 1958Jun 23, 2017 · 137 S. Ct. 1958Criminal procedure6–27–2 band
  6. Buck v. Davis137 S. Ct. 759Feb 22, 2017 · 137 S. Ct. 759Criminal procedure6–27–2 band

  7. United States v. Bryant579 U.S. 140Jun 13, 2016 · 579 U.S. 140Criminal procedure8–0Unanimous band

  8. Luis v. United States578 U.S. 5Mar 30, 2016 · 578 U.S. 5Criminal procedure5–36–3 band

  9. Kaley v. United States571 U.S. 320Feb 25, 2014 · 571 U.S. 320Criminal procedure6–36–3 band

  10. Jose Padilla v. KentuckyLandmark · Other rights regarding counsel559 U.S. 356Mar 31, 2010 · 559 U.S. 356Criminal procedure7–27–2 band

  11. Jesse Jay Montejo v. LouisianaLandmark · Right to counsel556 U.S. 778May 26, 2009 · 556 U.S. 778Criminal procedure5–45–4 band

  12. Indiana v. Edwards554 U.S. 164Jun 19, 2008 · 554 U.S. 164Criminal procedure7–27–2 band

  13. United States v. Cuauhtemoc Gonzalez-Lopez548 U.S. 140Jun 26, 2006 · 548 U.S. 140Criminal procedure5–45–4 band

  14. Ronald Rompilla v. Jeffrey A. Beard, Secretary, Pennsylvania Department of Corrections545 U.S. 374Jun 20, 2005 · 545 U.S. 374Criminal procedure5–45–4 band

  15. Florida v. Joe Elton Nixon543 U.S. 175Dec 13, 2004 · 543 U.S. 175Criminal procedure8–0Unanimous band

  16. Iowa v. Felipe Edgardo Tovar541 U.S. 77Mar 8, 2004 · 541 U.S. 77Criminal procedure9–0Unanimous band

  17. John J. Fellers v. United States540 U.S. 519Jan 26, 2004 · 540 U.S. 519Criminal procedure9–0Unanimous band
  18. Kevin Wiggins v. Sewall Smith, Warden, et al.539 U.S. 510Jun 26, 2003 · 539 U.S. 510Criminal procedure7–27–2 band
  19. Alabama v. Lereed Shelton535 U.S. 654May 20, 2002 · 535 U.S. 654Criminal procedure5–45–4 band

  20. Walter Mickens, Jr. v. John Taylor, Warden535 U.S. 162Mar 27, 2002 · 535 U.S. 162Criminal procedure5–45–4 band
  21. Texas v. Raymond Levi Cobb532 U.S. 162Apr 2, 2001 · 532 U.S. 162Criminal procedure5–45–4 band

  22. Paul L. Glover v. United States531 U.S. 198Jan 9, 2001 · 531 U.S. 198Criminal procedure9–0Unanimous band
  23. Ernest C. Roe, Warden v. Lucio Flores-Ortega528 U.S. 470Feb 23, 2000 · 528 U.S. 470Criminal procedure6–36–3 band
  24. Salvador Martinez v. Court of Appeal of California, Fourth Appellate District528 U.S. 152Jan 12, 2000 · 528 U.S. 152Criminal procedure9–0Unanimous band

  25. Kenneth O. Nichols v. United States511 U.S. 738Jun 6, 1994 · 511 U.S. 738Criminal procedure6–36–3 band

  26. A. L. Lockhart, Director, Arkansas Department of Correction v. Bobby Ray Fretwell506 U.S. 364Jan 25, 1993 · 506 U.S. 364Criminal procedure7–27–2 band

  27. Paul McNeil v. Wisconsin501 U.S. 171Jun 13, 1991 · 501 U.S. 171Criminal procedure6–36–3 band

  28. Michigan v. Tyris Lemont Harvey494 U.S. 344Mar 5, 1990 · 494 U.S. 344Criminal procedure5–45–4 band
  29. Caplin & Drysdale, Chartered v. United States491 U.S. 617Jun 22, 1989 · 491 U.S. 617Criminal procedure5–45–4 band
  30. United States v. Monsanto491 U.S. 600Jun 22, 1989 · 491 U.S. 600Criminal procedure5–45–4 band
  31. Perry v. Leeke, Commissioner, South Carolina Department of Corrections, et al.488 U.S. 272Jan 1, 1989 · 488 U.S. 272Criminal procedure6–36–3 band
  32. Patterson v. Illinois487 U.S. 285Jun 24, 1988 · 487 U.S. 285Criminal procedure5–45–4 band
  33. Satterwhite v. Texas486 U.S. 249May 31, 1988 · 486 U.S. 249Criminal procedure8–0Unanimous band
  34. Wheat v. United States486 U.S. 153May 23, 1988 · 486 U.S. 153Criminal procedure5–45–4 band

  35. Burger v. Kemp, Warden483 U.S. 776Jun 26, 1987 · 483 U.S. 776Criminal procedure5–45–4 band
  36. Kuhlmann, Superintendent, Sullivan Correctional Facility v. Wilson477 U.S. 436Jun 26, 1986 · 477 U.S. 436Criminal procedure6–36–3 band
  37. Kimmelman, Attorney General of New Jersey, et al. v. Morrison477 U.S. 365Jun 26, 1986 · 477 U.S. 365Criminal procedure9–0Unanimous band

  38. Michigan v. JacksonLandmark · Right to counsel475 U.S. 625Apr 1, 1986 · 475 U.S. 625Criminal procedure6–36–3 band

  39. Nix, Warden v. Whiteside475 U.S. 157Feb 26, 1986 · 475 U.S. 157Criminal procedure9–0Unanimous band
  40. Maine v. Moulton474 U.S. 159Dec 10, 1985 · 474 U.S. 159Criminal procedure5–45–4 band
  41. Evitts, Superintendent, Blackburn Correctional Complex, et al. v. Lucey469 U.S. 387Jan 21, 1985 · 469 U.S. 387Criminal procedure7–27–2 band
  42. Nix, Warden of the Iowa State Penitentiary v. WilliamsLandmark · Fourth Amendment rights467 U.S. 431Jun 11, 1984 · 467 U.S. 431Criminal procedure7–27–2 band

  43. United States v. Gouveia et al.467 U.S. 180May 29, 1984 · 467 U.S. 180Criminal procedure8–18–1 band

  44. McKaskle, Acting Director, Texas Department of Corrections v. Wiggins465 U.S. 168Jan 23, 1984 · 465 U.S. 168Criminal procedure6–36–3 band
  45. Jones, Superintendent, Great Meadow Correctional Facility, et al. v. Barnes463 U.S. 745Jul 5, 1983 · 463 U.S. 745Criminal procedure7–27–2 band
  46. Morris, Warden v. Slappy461 U.S. 1Apr 20, 1983 · 461 U.S. 1Criminal procedure9–0Unanimous band
  47. Lassiter v. Department of Social Services of Durham County, North Carolina452 U.S. 18Jun 1, 1981 · 452 U.S. 18Criminal procedure5–45–4 band
  48. United States v. Morrison449 U.S. 361Jan 13, 1981 · 449 U.S. 361Criminal procedure9–0Unanimous band
  49. United States v. Henry447 U.S. 264Jun 16, 1980 · 447 U.S. 264Criminal procedure6–36–3 band
  50. Cuyler, Correctional Superintendent, et al. v. Sullivan446 U.S. 335May 12, 1980 · 446 U.S. 335Criminal procedure8–18–1 band
  51. Baldasar v. Illinois446 U.S. 222Apr 22, 1980 · 446 U.S. 222Criminal procedure5–45–4 band
  52. Scott v. Illinois440 U.S. 367Mar 5, 1979 · 440 U.S. 367Criminal procedure5–45–4 band
  53. Brewer, Warden v. Williams430 U.S. 387Mar 23, 1977 · 430 U.S. 387Criminal procedure5–45–4 band
  54. Weatherford, Agent of the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division, et al. v. Bursey429 U.S. 545Feb 22, 1977 · 429 U.S. 545Criminal procedure7–27–2 band
  55. Geders v. United States425 U.S. 80Mar 30, 1976 · 425 U.S. 80Criminal procedure8–0Unanimous band
  56. Middendorf, Secretary of the Navy, et al. v. Henry et al.425 U.S. 25Mar 24, 1976 · 425 U.S. 25Criminal procedure5–36–3 band
  57. Herring v. New York422 U.S. 853Jun 30, 1975 · 422 U.S. 853Criminal procedure6–36–3 band
  58. Faretta v. California422 U.S. 806Jun 30, 1975 · 422 U.S. 806Criminal procedure6–36–3 band

  59. Gagnon, Warden v. ScarpelliLandmark · Other criminal sentences411 U.S. 778May 14, 1973 · 411 U.S. 778Criminal procedure8–18–1 band
  60. Milton v. Wainwright, Corrections Director407 U.S. 371Jun 22, 1972 · 407 U.S. 371Criminal procedure5–45–4 band
  61. Argersinger v. Hamlin, Sheriff407 U.S. 25Jun 12, 1972 · 407 U.S. 25Criminal procedure9–0Unanimous band

  62. United States v. Tucker404 U.S. 443Jan 11, 1972 · 404 U.S. 443Criminal procedure5–27–2 band
  63. Skinner et al. v. Louisiana393 U.S. 473Jan 27, 1969 · 393 U.S. 473Criminal procedure6–36–3 band
  64. Mempa v. Rhay, Penitentiary Superintendent389 U.S. 128Nov 13, 1967 · 389 U.S. 128Criminal procedure9–0Unanimous band
  65. Burgett v. Texas389 U.S. 109Nov 13, 1967 · 389 U.S. 109Criminal procedure6–36–3 band
  66. Escobedo v. IllinoisLandmark · Right to counsel378 U.S. 478Jun 22, 1964 · 378 U.S. 478Criminal procedure5–45–4 band

  67. Massiah v. United States377 U.S. 201May 18, 1964 · 377 U.S. 201Criminal procedure6–36–3 band

  68. White v. Maryland373 U.S. 59Apr 29, 1963 · 373 U.S. 59Criminal procedure9–0Unanimous band

  69. Gideon v. Wainwright, Corrections DirectorLandmark · Right to counsel372 U.S. 335Mar 18, 1963 · 372 U.S. 335Criminal procedure9–0Unanimous band

  70. Carnley v. Cochran, Corrections Director369 U.S. 506Apr 30, 1962 · 369 U.S. 506Criminal procedure7–0Unanimous band
  71. Chewning v. Cunningham, Penitentiary Superintendent368 U.S. 443Feb 19, 1962 · 368 U.S. 443Criminal procedure9–0Unanimous band
  72. Hamilton v. Alabama368 U.S. 52Nov 13, 1961 · 368 U.S. 52Criminal procedure9–0Unanimous band

  73. Ferguson v. Georgia365 U.S. 570Mar 27, 1961 · 365 U.S. 570Criminal procedure9–0Unanimous band
  74. Reynolds v. Cochran, Director of Division of Corrections365 U.S. 525Mar 20, 1961 · 365 U.S. 525Criminal procedure9–0Unanimous band
  75. McNeal v. Culver, State Prison Custodian365 U.S. 109Jan 23, 1961 · 365 U.S. 109Criminal procedure9–0Unanimous band
  76. Hudson v. North Carolina363 U.S. 697Jun 20, 1960 · 363 U.S. 697Criminal procedure7–27–2 band
  77. Anonymous Nos. 6 and 7 v. Baker, Justice of the Supreme Court of New York360 U.S. 287Jun 15, 1959 · 360 U.S. 287Criminal procedure5–45–4 band
  78. Cash v. Culver, State Prison Custodian358 U.S. 633Feb 24, 1959 · 358 U.S. 633Criminal procedure9–0Unanimous band
  79. Moore v. Michigan355 U.S. 155Dec 9, 1957 · 355 U.S. 155Criminal procedure5–45–4 band
  80. In re Groban et al.352 U.S. 330Feb 25, 1957 · 352 U.S. 330Criminal procedure5–45–4 band
  81. Massey v. Moore, Warden348 U.S. 105Dec 6, 1954 · 348 U.S. 105Criminal procedure8–0Unanimous band
  82. Chandler v. Warden Fretag348 U.S. 3Nov 8, 1954 · 348 U.S. 3Criminal procedure8–0Unanimous band
  83. Palmer v. Ashe, Warden342 U.S. 134Dec 11, 1951 · 342 U.S. 134Criminal procedure5–45–4 band
  84. Quicksall v. Michigan339 U.S. 660Jun 5, 1950 · 339 U.S. 660Criminal procedure7–18–1 band
  85. Gibbs v. Burke, Warden337 U.S. 773Jun 27, 1949 · 337 U.S. 773Criminal procedure9–0Unanimous band
  86. Uveges v. Pennsylvania335 U.S. 437Dec 13, 1948 · 335 U.S. 437Criminal procedure6–36–3 band
  87. Gryger v. Burke, Warden334 U.S. 728Jun 14, 1948 · 334 U.S. 728Criminal procedure5–45–4 band
  88. Bute v. Illinois333 U.S. 640Apr 19, 1948 · 333 U.S. 640Criminal procedure5–45–4 band
  89. Von Moltke v. Gillies, Superintendent of the Detroit House of Correction332 U.S. 708Jan 19, 1948 · 332 U.S. 708Criminal procedure6–36–3 band
  90. Gayes v. New York332 U.S. 145Jun 23, 1947 · 332 U.S. 145Criminal procedure5–45–4 band
  91. Foster et al. v. Illinois332 U.S. 134Jun 23, 1947 · 332 U.S. 134Criminal procedure5–45–4 band
  92. De Meerleer v. Michigan329 U.S. 663Feb 3, 1947 · 329 U.S. 663Criminal procedure9–0Unanimous band
  93. Carter v. Illinois329 U.S. 173Dec 9, 1946 · 329 U.S. 173Criminal procedure5–45–4 band
Data notes

Every other orally argued case with a clear vote, from the 1946 term on, that the Supreme Court Database files under the same issue as this one. The database gives each case one issue from a list of about 270 (abortion, search and seizure of vehicles, the death penalty, and so on), whatever law it turned on.

Report a correction

Official record

Read the full opinion on Justia, the argument audio on Oyez and Wikipedia. Case data from the Supreme Court Database, Version 2026 Release 01, through the 2025 term.