Eller v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"In Strickland v. Washington , 466 U.S. 668 , 687, 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984), the United States Supreme Court articulated two criteria that must be satisfied to show ineffective assistance of counsel. A defendant has the burden of proving (1) that his counsel's performance was deficient and (2) that the deficient performance actually prejudiced the defense. 'To meet the first prong of the test, the petitioner must show that his counsel's representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness. The performance inquiry must be whether counsel's assistance was reasonable, considering all the circumstances.' Ex parte Lawley , 512 So.2d 1370 , 1372 (Ala.1987). ' "This court must avoid using 'hindsight' to evaluate the performance of counsel. We must evaluate all the circumstances surrounding the case at the time of counsel's actions before determining whether counsel rendered ineffective assistance." ' Lawhorn v. State , 756 So.2d 971 , 979 (Ala.Crim.App.1999) (quoting Hallford v. State , 629 So.2d 6 , 9 (Ala.Crim.App.1992) ). 'A court must indulge a strong presumption that counsel's conduct falls within the wide range of reasonable professional assistance.' Strickland , 466 U.S. at 689 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 . As the United States Supreme Court has explained: " 'Judicial scrutiny of counsel's performance must be highly deferential. It is all too tempting for a defendant to second-guess counsel's assistance after conviction or adverse sentence, and it is all too e”

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