State v. Sneed’s Empirical Analysis
1974
Citation profile
84 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 87 later decisions — most recently June 2018 · most notably State v. Braswell (1985), State v. Hutchins (1981)
84 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 Glasser v. United States · Powell v. State of Alabama Patterson · Mooney v. Holohan · Avery v. State of Alabama · Seelig v. United States
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 87 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he incompetency (or one of its many synonyms) of counsel for the defendant in a criminal prosecution is not a Constitutional denial of his right to effective counsel unless the attorney’s representation is so lacking that the trial has become a farce and a mockery of justice.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“... such a standard is necessary, since every practicing attorney knows that a `hindsight' combing of a criminal record will in nearly every case reveal some possible error in judgment or disclose at least one trial tactic more attractive than those employed at trial.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage““. . . A review of these decisions indicates the general rule to be that the incompetency (or one of its many synonyms) of counsel for the defendant in a criminal prosecution is not a Constitutional denial of his right to effective counsel unless the attorney’s representation is so lacking that the trial has become a farce and a mockery of justice. [Citations omitted.] “Consistent with the above stated general rule, it has been held that the question of Constitutional inadequacy of representation cannot be determined solely upon the amount of time counsel spends with the accused or upon the intensiveness of his investigation. [Citations omitted.] Neither does the Sixth Amendment guarantee the best available counsel, errorless counsel, or satisfactory results for the accused. [Citations omitted.] Nevertheless, counsel cannot assume the role of amicus curiae, Ellis v. United States, 356 U.S. 674 , 2 L.Ed. 2d 1060 , but must function in the active role of an advocate. Entsminger v. Iowa, 386 U.S. 748 , 18 L.Ed. 2d 501 . Nor can counsel be hobbled by divided loyalties. [Citations omitted.]””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Hensley
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.