Kennebrew v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
57 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 57 later decisions — most recently January 2025 · most notably Turpin v. Todd (1997), 260 Ga. App. 213 - Parnell v. State (2003)
57 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1915
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Davis v. Alaska · Hines v. State · 6 Cal. 4th 684 - People v. Smith · 171 Ill. 2d 158 - People v. Munson
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 57 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[C]ounsel, whether retained or appointed, cannot reasonably be expected to assert a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel against himself or any member of his firm or office[.]”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“[W]e hold the trial court erred in addressing the merits of [the appellant's] motion for new trial on the issue of ineffective assistance of trial counsel without first appointing new counsel. That portion of the judgment is stricken, and the case is remanded for the trial court to consider the allegation of ineffective assistance under the representation of new counsel.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“A criminal defendant has the right to cross-examine a witness concerning pending criminal charges against the witness for purposes of exposing a witness’ motivation in testifying, e.g., bias, partiality, or agreement between the government and the witness. [Cits.] At the same time, the extent of cross-examination is within the sound discretion of the trial court.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Mays v. State
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.