Barkell v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 federal appellate · 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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[¶ 16] Claims of ineffective assistance of counsel are reviewed under the following standard: “When reviewing a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, the paramount determination is whether, in light of all the circumstances, trial counsel’s acts or omissions were outside the wide range of professionally competent assistance. Herdt v. State, 891 P.2d 793, 796 (Wyo.1995); Starr v. State, 888 P.2d 1262, 1266-67 (Wyo.1995); Arner v. State, 872 P.2d 100, 104 (Wyo.1994); Frias v. State, 722 P.2d 135, 145 (Wyo.1986). The reviewing court should indulge a strong presumption that counsel rendered adequate assistance and made all significant decisions in the exercise of reasonable professional judgment. Herdt , at 796; Starr , at 1266; Arner , at 104; Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 689 , 104 S.Ct. 2052, 2065 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). Under the two-prong standard articulated in Strickland and Frias , an appellant claiming ineffective assistance of counsel must demonstrate on the record that counsel’s performance was deficient and that prejudice resulted. Strickland, 466 U.S. at 687 , 104 S.Ct. at 2064 ; Starr , at 1266; King v. State, 810 P.2d 119, 125 (Wyo.1991) (Cardine, J., dissenting); Campbell v. State, 728 P.2d 628, 629 (Wyo.1986); Frias, 722 P.2d at 145 . In other words, to warrant reversal on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, an appellant must demonstrate that his counsel failed to ‘render such assistance as would have been offered by a reasonably compet”

   12 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Jackson v. State · Siler v. State

2. “Speculation as to how the cross-examination could have been conducted differently does not meet the Strickland test for ineffective assistance.”

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Jackson v. State · Farmer v. State

3. “In McCoy v. State, 886 P.2d 252, 256 (Wyo.1994), we recognized that failure to call an expert witness may constitute ineffective assistance of counsel. However, in Bloomquist v. State, 914 P.2d 812 (Wyo. 1996), we also stated that “the defendant must show that such expert testimony was available and necessary” and that “[appellant must show that an expert was available who would have testified consistently with his theory.” Id. at 820 .”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Rhodes v. State · Strickland v. State