Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 172 P3D 804 - Coffman v. State

Coffman v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2007

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
1
states following
April 2023
most recently cited

10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently April 2023

10 state decisions

70200720102020decided

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 Jones v. Barnes · Smith v. Murray · State v. Reed · The PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, Plaintiff-Appellee/Cross-Appellant v. Frank D. RODRIGUEZ, Defendant-Appellant/Cross-Appellee. · Briones v. State

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

  1. “[The petitioner] raises a specialized claim of incompetence: she asserts that her appellate attorney incompetently selected the issues to be pursued on appeal. Courts from around the country are in basic agreement concerning the prima facie case that a defendant must present to support a claim of attorney incompetence in this situation. To establish a prima facie case that an appellate counsel’s choice of issues was incompetent, the defendant must establish (1) that the proposed additional issue is significantly stronger than the issues that were raised in the appeal; (2) that the appellate attorney had no valid tactical reason for failing to include this particular •issue; and (3) that, if the proposed issue had been included, there is a reasonable possibility that the outcome of the appeal would have been different. [Footnote omitted] Although proof of these three elements will establish a prima facie case, the ultimate question is not whether the appellate attorney could have done better. Rather, the ultimate question is whether the attorney’s choice of issues was so ill-considered that it fails to demonstrate the minimal competence required of criminal law practitioners.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “the legality of a sentence, or the lawfulness of the procedures under which the sentence was imposed, or the sufficiency of the evidence to support the findings that affected the judge's sentencing authority....”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “[E]ven though it is the [criminal] defendant's decision whether to appeal, it is the attorney's role to decide which issues to raise on appeal.”
    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.