Reeves v. Alabama

Summary

Justice Sotomayor dissents from the Supreme Court’s denial of a petition for a writ of certiorari in Reeves v. Alabama. She argues that the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals erred by imposing a rule that a petitioner must call trial counsel to testify to prove ineffective assistance, a requirement contrary to Strickland v. Washington and Supreme Court precedent. The dissent contends that the appellate court failed to consider the full record of counsel’s performance, thereby violating the Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel.