Bridges v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

34 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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “To prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, a defendant must show that counsel's performance was deficient and that the deficient performance so prejudiced the defendant that there is a reasonable likelihood that, but for counsel's errors, the outcome of the trial would have been different. [See] Strickland v. Washington , 466 U.S. 668 , 687, 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). If an appellant fails to meet his or her burden of proving either prong of the Strickland test, the reviewing court does not have to examine the other prong. In reviewing the trial court's decision, we accept the trial court's factual findings and credibility determinations unless clearly erroneous, but we independently apply the legal principles to the facts. Furthermore, there is a strong presumption that the performance of counsel was within the wide range of reasonable professional lawyering, and we cannot reach a contrary conclusion unless defendant successfully rebuts the presumption by clear and convincing evidence. Judicial scrutiny of counsel's performance must be highly deferential.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. ALLEN v. the STATE.

2. “[W]here, as here, a defendant is not challenging his conviction directly based on an alleged violation of the right to be present, but instead raises the issue only indirectly under the aegis of an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, he or,she must satisfy both prongs of the Strickland test for constitutional ineffective assistance of counsel claims.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Hall v. Warden, Lee Arrendale State Prison

3. “the evidence of Bridges’ guilt was overwhelming, and there is no reasonable probability that the outcome would have been more favorable if counsel had objected to his absence during the pretrial instructions.” Id. . As we have noted: The statutory phrase”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Hall v. Warden, Lee Arrendale State Prison