Stansell v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
50 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 52 later decisions — most recently September 2020 · most notably Washington v. State (2003), Cheddersingh v. State (2012)
50 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 · Jackson v. Virginia · Humphrey v. State · Wall v. State · Hayes 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 52 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The test for reasonable attorney performance “has nothing to do with what the best lawyers would have done. Nor is the test even what most good lawyers would have done. We ask only whether some reasonable lawyer at the trial could have acted, in the circumstances, as defense counsel acted at trial. . . . [W]e are not interested in grading lawyers’ performances; we are interested in whether the adversarial process at trial, in fact, worked adequately.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage““In order to establish ineffectiveness of trial counsel under Strickland v. Washington, 466 U. S. 668 (104 SC 2052, 80 LE2d 674) (1984), appellant must show that counsel’s performance was deficient and that the deficient performance prejudiced the defense.” [Cit.] “There is a strong presumption that the performance of trial counsel ‘falls within the wide range of reasonable professional assistance.’ [Cit.]” [Cit.] “The reasonableness of the conduct is viewed at the time of trial and under the circumstances of the case.” [Cit.] . . . “The test for reasonable attorney performance . . . [is] whether some reasonable lawyer at the trial could have acted, in the circumstances, as defense counsel acted at trial. . . .””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“the trial court charged “the jury on the elements of the defense of accident, the presumption of innocence, the burden of proof in general, criminal intent, and the burden to prove the elements of the crimes alleged in the indictment,” the trial court did not err in failing to give an additional charge on the State’s burden to disprove the defense of accident beyond a reasonable doubt. [Cit.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Shadron 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.