Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 32 A.3d 901 - Brown v. State

Brown v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2011

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
1
states following
February 2016
most recently cited

21 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Strickland v. Washington · O'NEIL v. State · Shatney v. State · State v. Brown · State v. Ouimette

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

  1. ““[A]ppointed counsel must file with the court and serve upon the applicant a motion to withdraw accompanied by a ‘no merit’ memorandum that details the nature and extent of his or her review of the case, lists each issue the applicant wished to raise, and explains why in counsel’s professional opinion those issues and any others that he or she may have investigated lacked merit. The court then must conduct a hearing with the applicant present. If, based upon its review of counsel’s assessment of the potential grounds for seeking post-conviction relief and of any other issues that the applicant wishes to raise, the court agrees that those grounds appear to lack any arguable merit, then it shall permit counsel to withdraw and advise the applicant that he or she shall be required to proceed pro se, if he or she chooses to pursue the application.” Id.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““The applicant could have and indeed should have raised this issue in his first application for postconviction relief. His failure to raise this allegation at that time results in a bar to the litigation of that issue and that claim for relief. This Court has not heard from [the] applicant, nor can it glean from the record, a valid reason why this issue was not raised in the first application for post-conviction relief.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “To satisfy this two-part inquiry, an applicant must prove that: '(1) counsel's performance was deficient and (2) the deficient performance prejudiced the defense.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.