Philip James Ostrander v. Fred W. Green, Warden

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that “the potential strength of the [government’s] case” is an objective factor relevant to the prejudice analysis
• concluding that a “reasonable defendant” had demonstrated that he would not have pleaded guilty, but for his counsel’s errors, based in part on the “potential strength of the state’s case”—“which [was] hardly invincible on its face”
• discussing prejudice prong of Hill and observing that “[ojbjective analysis of the prejudice prong is probably the only workable means of applying Hill”
• overruled on other grounds by O’Dell v. Netherland, 95 F.3d 1214 (4th Cir. 1996)
• “A reasonable defendant sitting in jail and facing a difficult decision that may subject him to many more years of the same could certainly be swayed by [defense counsel’s] confident, though grossly uninformed, prediction that he would probably be breathing free air within days.”
• regarding misinformation about defendant’s eligibility for work release

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).