Which statement best describes the standard for ineffective assistance of counsel?

• A. The defendant must show only deficiency
• B. There must be deficient performance and, but-for prejudice; often a colorable argument that the defendant is not guilty
• C. There must be prosecutorial misconduct
• D. The defendant must show actual innocence

Answer: (B)

The standard being tested is the Strickland two-prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel. To win an ineffective-assistance claim, the defendant must show that counsel’s performance was deficient—fell below an objective standard of reasonableness given the circumstances—and that this deficiency caused actual prejudice to the defense. Prejudice means there is a reasonable probability that, but for the attorney’s errors, the result would have been different (not just a possibility or a stronger argument, but a likely different outcome). This is why simply showing deficient performance isn’t enough; there must also be a showing that the outcome could have been different.

The other statements miss part of the standard. Deficient performance alone isn’t enough without prejudice; prosecutorial misconduct is a separate claim; and showing actual innocence isn’t required to prevail on an ineffective-assistance claim.