State v. Dixon’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
56 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently September 2025 · most notably State v. Silvers (1998), State v. Coleman (1992)
56 state decisions
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 · United States v. Jacobsen · Burdeau v. McDowell · Illinois v. Lafayette · Colorado v. Spring
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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]o sustain a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel as a violation of the sixth amendment to the U.S. Constitution and thereby obtain reversal of a defendant’s conviction, the defendant must show that (1) counsel’s performance was deficient and (2) such deficient performance prejudiced the defense, that is, a demonstration of reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s deficient performance, the result of the proceeding would have been different.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Palmer · State v. White““In an evidentiary hearing, as a bench trial provided by §§ 29-3001 et seq. for postconviction relief, the trial judge, as the ‘trier of fact,’ resolves conflicts in evidence and questions of fact, including witness credibility and weight to be given a witness’ testimony. [Citation omitted.] In an appeal involving a proceeding for postconviction relief, the trial court’s findings will be upheld unless such findings are clearly erroneous.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Moss · State v. White““[A] court need not determine whether counsel’s performance was deficient before examining the prejudice suffered by the defendant as a result of the alleged deficiencies. The object of an ineffectiveness claim is not to grade counsel’s performance. If it is easier to dispose of an ineffectiveness claim on the ground of lack of sufficient prejudice, which we expect will often be so, that course should be followed....””
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Moss · State v. White
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.