State v. Mathews’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

26 state decisions

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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “operation and management of motor vehicles”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Ambro · State v. Beasley

2. “The benchmark for judging a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel is “whether counsel’s conduct so undermined the proper functioning of the adversarial process that the trial cannot be relied on as having produced a just result.” Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 686 , 104 S.Ct. 2052, 2064 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674, 692-93 (1984). The test for evaluating whether a criminal defendant has received the effective assistance of counsel is the two prong test found in Strickland. See id. Under this test, a petitioner must show both that: 1) his counsel’s conduct was deficient because it fell outside the wide range of professional norms, and 2) the petitioner was prejudiced as a result of that deficient conduct. See id. at 687 , 104 S.Ct. at 2064 , 80 L.Ed.2d at 693 . Under the Idaho Constitution, Idaho courts employ the same two-part test in assuring that a defendant receive “reasonably competent assistance of counsel.” Aragon v. State, 114 Idaho 758, 761 , 760 P.2d 1174, 1177 (1988) (quoting Gibson v. State, 110 Idaho 631, 635 , 718 P.2d 283, 287 (1986)); see also Carter v. State, 108 Idaho 788, 794 , 702 P.2d 826, 832 (1985). In evaluating defense counsel’s actions under the Strickland standard, we first address whether counsel’s performance was deficient. To satisfy the deficient performance prong, the defendant is required to show “that counsel made errors so serious that counsel was not functioning as the ‘counsel’ guaranteed the defendant by the Sixth Amendment.” Strickland,”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Laughlin v. State

3. “Whether one or more of these sovereigns possess criminal jurisdiction in a particular instance depends upon the type of offense committed, where the offense was committed, and whether either the perpetrator or the victim is Indian.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. George