Bledsoe v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 32 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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “When faced with an Anders brief and if a later pro se brief is filed, the Court of Appeals has two choices. It may deter mine that the appeal is wholly frivolous and issue an opinion explaining that it has reviewed the record and Ends no reversible error. Anders, 386 U.S. at 744, 87 S.Ct. 1396 . Or, it may determine that arguable grounds for appeal exist and remand the cause to the trial court so that new counsel may be appointed to brief the issues. Stafford, 813 S.W.2d at 511.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Villanueva v. State

2. “... the court of appeals is not required to review the merits of each claim raised in an Anders brief or a pro se response. The court’s duty is to determine whether there are any arguable grounds and if there are, to remand to the trial court so that new counsel may be appointed to brief the issues.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Villanueva v. State

3. “Under Anders , an appellant has a right to review the Anders brief that counsel submitted and to respond to it on his own. In the case before us, the pro se brief that Appellant filed in response to his counsel's filing of an Anders brief is not dual representation.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Fratta v. Davis