165 W. Va. 393 - Scott v. Mohn’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

20 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““In the determination of a claim that an accused was prejudiced by ineffective assistance of counsel violative of Article III, Section 14 of the West Virginia Constitution and the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution, courts should measure and compare the questioned counsel’s performance by whether he exhibited the normal and customary degree of skill possessed by attorneys who are reasonably knowledgeable of criminal law, except that proved counsel error which does not affect the outcome of the case, will be regarded as harmless error.””

   6 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 165 W. Va. 812 - Carrico v. Griffith · 165 W. Va. 540 - State v. Foddrell

2. ““Distilling the principles taught by those cases we find that the Court should make the following inquiries as to whether: “1) counsel was promptly furnished to the accused; “2) counsel was afforded a reasonable time to prepare to defend the accused; “3) counsel promptly conferred and thoroughly discussed the facts and the law with the client, including but not limited to advising him of his rights, matters of defense, etc.; “4) counsel conducted any investigation of the facts and the law in preparation for trial; “5) counsel exhibited the normal and customary degree of skill possessed by attorneys who are reasonably knowledgeable of criminal law; and, “6) any prejudice resulted to the accused in the event any of the above guidelines were, not . followed. “An omission on failure to abide by the above requirements may constitute a denial of effective assistance of counsel unless the state can estab lish lack of prejudice thereby.” _ W. Va. at -, 268 S.E.2d at 119-20 . 10 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 169 W. Va. 191 - State v. Hatfield