299 Ga. App. 368 - Jacobs v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

16 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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[T]o prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, a criminal defendant must show that counsel’s performance was deficient and that the deficient performance so prejudiced the client that there is a reasonable likelihood that, but for counsel’s errors, the outcome of the trial would have been different. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U. S. 668 (104 SC 2052, 80 LE2d 674) (1984). The criminal defendant must overcome the strong presumption that trial counsel’s conduct falls within the broad range of reasonable and professional conduct. [As an appellate court, we] accept the trial court’s factual findings and credibility determinations unless clearly erroneous, but we independently apply the legal principles to the facts.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Mastrogiovanni v. State

2. “Pretermitting whether the testimony at issue was . . . hearsay, since both of the declarants testified at trial and were subject to questioning by the defense, the declarants made the statements at issue either during the shooting or immediately thereafter when . . . crying and [upset] .... Thus, they were admissible as part of the res gestae of the crime. [Cits.]”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. McIlwain v. State

3. “Although Georgia appellate courts have often noted that it would be preferable to have defendant’s personal participation spread on the record in open court, to forestall subsequent claims of lack of participation or an intelligent or knowing waiver, nonetheless, there is no legal precedent requiring an in court waiver of the right of a jury trial.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Seitman v. State