Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2004 ND 228 - State v. Steen

State v. Steen’s Empirical Analysis

2004

Citation profile

23
cited by 23 later decisions
1
states following
December 2022
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 21 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently December 2022

1 federal appellate · 21 state decisions

160200420102020decided

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 Strickland v. Washington · Estelle v. Williams · Heckelsmiller v. State · Garcia v. State · DeCoteau 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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[A] defendant claiming ineffective assistance of counsel has a heavy burden of proving (1) counsel’s representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness, and (2) the defendant was prejudiced by counsel’s deficient performance. “Effectiveness of counsel is measured by an ‘objective standard of reasonableness’ considering ‘prevailing professional norms.’ ” The defendant must first overcome the “strong presumption that counsel’s conduct falls within the wide range of reasonable professional assistance.” “Trial counsel’s conduct is presumed to be reasonable and courts consciously attempt to limit the distorting effect of hindsight.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Effectiveness of counsel is measured by an 'objective standard of reasonableness' considering ' prevailing professional norms.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “The issue of ineffective assistance of counsel is a mixed question of law and fact which is fully reviewable by this Court.”
    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.