Important: This article is general information about ineffective assistance of counsel in Indiana. It isn't legal advice, and every case turns on its own record. If you think a trial lawyer let you or someone you love down, talk to an attorney sooner rather than later.

When a conviction comes down, the second-guessing starts almost immediately. Was there a witness who never got called? A motion nobody filed? Advice that felt wrong at the time and feels worse now? If those questions are keeping you up, you're not imagining things, and you're asking something the law actually cares about.

The Sixth Amendment doesn't just promise you a lawyer. It promises a lawyer who does the job competently. When a defense attorney's work falls far enough below that line, and the failure likely changed the outcome, the law has a name for it: ineffective assistance of counsel. Here's how it actually works in Indiana.

What "Ineffective Assistance" Really Means

This is a constitutional claim, not a complaint about a lawyer you didn't click with. It says your attorney performed so poorly that the conviction or sentence can't stand. Disagreeing with a strategy doesn't get you there. Specific, identifiable failures might.

The bar is high on purpose. Courts start from the assumption that a licensed attorney knew what they were doing, and it's on you to show otherwise. A guilty verdict, by itself, proves nothing about your lawyer's competence.

The Two Questions Courts Ask (the Strickland Test)

Indiana and federal courts both use the test from Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984). Our Supreme Court has applied it for decades, including in Timberlake v. State, 753 N.E.2d 591 (Ind. 2001). It comes down to two questions, and you have to answer both:

  • Was the lawyer's performance deficient? Did it fall "below an objective standard of reasonableness"?
  • Did it cause prejudice? Is there a "reasonable probability" that the result would have been different without the mistakes?

Both halves matter. A serious blunder that changed nothing isn't enough. Neither is a terrible outcome that didn't come from an unreasonable mistake. Almost every ineffective-assistance claim lives or dies on this two-part test.

Part One: Deficient Performance

The first question is whether a competent attorney would have done what yours did. Courts give real room for strategy. If your lawyer made a deliberate call — say, keeping a risky witness off the stand — that usually isn't deficient, even if you'd have played it differently.

What courts look for is the choice no reasonable attorney would make. In practice, that's usually a failure to prepare, investigate, or follow through, not a judgment call made in the heat of trial.

Part Two: Prejudice

The second question is whether the mistake actually mattered. You don't have to prove you'd have won. You have to show a reasonable probability of a different result — enough to shake confidence in what happened.

In a plea case, that usually means showing you'd have turned down the deal and gone to trial if you'd been advised correctly. The Supreme Court made clear in Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 (1985), that Strickland applies to advice about plea agreements too.

What This Looks Like in Real Cases

Every case is its own animal, but a handful of failures show up again and again in post-conviction litigation:

  • Never investigating or interviewing alibi witnesses
  • Skipping a motion to suppress evidence that was seized unlawfully
  • Giving wrong or half-complete advice about a plea offer
  • Blowing a deadline, including the deadline to appeal
  • Failing to object to evidence or argument that should have drawn one
  • Walking into trial unprepared

Each only counts if it also caused prejudice. Naming them is how you start asking the right question: did this change the outcome?

Why These Claims Go Through Post-Conviction Relief

In Indiana, you almost always raise ineffective assistance through post-conviction relief under Post-Conviction Rule 1, not on direct appeal. There's a practical reason. Proving it usually takes evidence from outside the trial record — often testimony from the trial lawyer about why they did or didn't do something. A direct appeal is stuck with the existing record, so there's nowhere to build that proof.

Post-conviction is its own civil case. You file a verified petition, the State answers, and the court can hold a hearing where witnesses testify and documents come in. You carry the burden, by a preponderance of the evidence. And because Indiana sharply limits how many petitions you get, you generally want every viable claim in the first one. Our complete guide to Indiana post-conviction relief walks through the whole process, and if a direct appeal is still on the table, what happens after you lose a trial covers those deadlines.

Ineffective Assistance Claims in Central Indiana

We handle post-conviction and ineffective-assistance work across Central Indiana, including Madison County (Anderson), Marion County (Indianapolis), Hamilton County (Noblesville), Hancock County (Greenfield), Shelby County (Shelbyville), Delaware County (Muncie), and Henry County (New Castle). These cases usually start in the county where the conviction happened, and a lot of the people who call us are family members doing the research for someone who's incarcerated. Wherever it started, the sooner someone reviews the record, the better.

Common Questions

Can I file an ineffective assistance claim if I took a plea deal?
Yes. Ineffective assistance can occur during plea negotiations as well as at trial. In Hill v. Lockhart, the U.S. Supreme Court applied the two-part Strickland test to guilty pleas. If your attorney gave you seriously wrong advice about a plea and you would have made a different decision with correct advice, that can be the basis for a claim raised through post-conviction relief.
How long do I have to file a post-conviction petition in Indiana?
Indiana Post-Conviction Rule 1 does not set a strict filing deadline, but waiting too long can hurt you. Under the doctrine of laches, the State can argue that an unreasonable delay that prejudiced the State should bar relief. Evidence and witnesses also fade over time. The safest course is to speak with an attorney as soon as you believe your trial counsel may have failed you.
What if my attorney made a strategic decision — does that count?
Courts give attorneys wide latitude on strategy. A reasonable tactical choice — even one that did not work out — usually is not ineffective assistance. The question is not whether a different lawyer would have done something else, but whether the decision fell below an objective standard of reasonableness. This is why these claims require careful review of the full record.
What happens if the court finds my attorney was ineffective?
If a court grants post-conviction relief on an ineffective assistance claim, the remedy depends on where the failure occurred. The court may vacate the conviction and order a new trial, allow you to withdraw a guilty plea, or order a new sentencing hearing. It does not automatically mean you go free — it means the constitutional error is corrected.
Can I raise ineffective assistance if I never appealed my conviction?
Often, yes. Ineffective assistance claims usually depend on facts outside the trial record, so Indiana courts generally expect them to be raised in a post-conviction petition rather than on direct appeal. Not having filed a direct appeal does not, by itself, prevent you from pursuing post-conviction relief, though the specifics of your case matter.

Have Questions About Your Case?

If you believe a trial attorney failed you or a loved one, attorney Emilee Hammond can review the record and explain your options. She represents people in post-conviction and ineffective assistance matters across Central Indiana.