Max Alexander Soffar v. Gary L. Johnson, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

13 federal appellate · 4 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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “a statement either is such an assertion of the right to counsel or it is not.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. 894 So. 2d 415 - State v. Butler · 833 So. 2d 927 - State v. Payne

2. “We find counsel’s defense strategy in this regard to be inexplicable. Given the powerfully exculpatory nature of the inconsistencies between Garner’s account of events and Soffar’s confession, which inconsistencies would render Sof-far’s confession implausible, one would have expected defense counsel to do everything in their power to get the substance of Garner’s police interviews before the jury either by calling Garner as a witness or by introducing the transcription of these interviews. Defense counsel should have at least interviewed Garner to determine if he could and would testify at Soffar’s trial consistent with his (Garner’s) prior statements. If Garner was not able or willing to so testify, defense counsel should have offered the prior statements, recorded and transcribed by the police, as record evidence of his testimony. Simply put, we are baffled by defense counsel’s strategy, or complete lack thereof, regarding Garner’s statements to the investigators.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Soffar v. Dretke

3. “By virtue of the fact that our grant of relief with respect to Soffar’s Fifth Amendment challenge would render discussion of the merits of these additional issues unnecessary, we likewise need not belabor the justifications for granting a COA on those issues.”). The panel denied Soffar a COA on all other claims presented, and these denials are also reinstated. 2 . This statement is the subject of some dispute. At the state habeas hearing, Schultz denied ever”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Soffar v. Cockrell