Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 130 N.M. 198 - Lytle v. Jordan

Lytle v. Jordan’s Empirical Analysis

2001

Citation profile

101
cited by 101 later decisions
3
states following
December 2021
most recently cited

99 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 101 later decisions — most recently December 2021 · most notably State v. Bernal (2006), State v. Roybal (2002)

99 state decisions

510200120102020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Cuyler v. Sullivan · Michel v. State of Louisiana Poret · State v. Gonzales · State v. Orosco

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 101 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “"The issues of whether defense counsel performed below the level of a reasonably competent attorney and whether deficient performance affected the result of the trial `are mixed questions of law and fact,' Strickland , 466 U.S. at 698 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , which `require the application of legal principles to the historical facts of this case.' Cuyler v. Sullivan , 446 U.S. 335 , 342 , 100 S.Ct. 1708 , 64 L.Ed.2d 333 (1980). The district court's determination of these questions represents `a conclusion of law rather than a finding of fact.' Id. at 341 , 100 S.Ct. 1708 . . . . ". . . We believe it is superfluous for expert witnesses to advise a court, whether it is the district court or an appellate court, about the proper application of existing law to the established historical facts and about the ultimate issue of trial counsel's effectiveness. See Provenzano v. Singletary , 148 F.3d 1327 , 1331-32 (11th Cir. 1998); Parkus v. State , 781 S.W.2d 545 , 548 (Mo. 1989) (en banc); State v. Thomas , 236 Neb. 553 , 462 N.W.2d 862 , 867 (1990); State v. Moore , 273 N.J.Super. 118 , 641 A.2d 268 , 272 (1994); Commonwealth v. Neal , 421 Pa.Super. 478 , 618 A.2d 438 , 439 n. 4 (1992)."”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “A reasonable probability is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome [of the proceeding].”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “'... We believe it is superfluous for expert witnesses to advise a court, whether it is the district court or an appellate court, about the proper application of existing law to the established historical facts and about the ultimate issue of trial counsel's effectiveness. See Provenzano v. Singletary , 148 F.3d 1327 , 1331-32 (11th Cir. 1998) ; Parkus v. State , 781 S.W.2d 545 , 548 (Mo. 1989) (en banc); State v. Thomas , 236 Neb. 553 , 462 N.W.2d 862 , 867 (1990) ; State v. Moore , 273 N.J. Super. 118 , 641 A.2d 268 , 272 (1994) ; Commonwealth v. Neal , 421 Pa. Super. 478 , 618 A.2d 438 , 439 n.4 (1992).' " 897 So.2d at 456 . Acklin attempts to distinguish McWilliams by arguing that his "claim involves a conflict of interest resulting from a third-party payer agreement.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.