Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 325 S.C. 182 - Johnson v. State

Johnson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1997

Citation profile

112
cited by 112 later decisions
1
states following
October 2016
most recently cited

112 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 112 later decisions — most recently October 2016 · most notably State v. Cheeseboro (2001), State v. Hamilton (2001)

112 state decisions

770199720002010decided

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 · Griffin v. California · Brendale v. Confederated Tribes & Bands of the Yakima Indian Nation · Eli Lilly & Co. v. Medtronic, Inc. · Belisle v. Anzivino

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

  1. “A reasonable probability is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “A defendant who enters a plea on the advice of counsel may only attack the voluntary and intelligent character of the plea by showing that counsel's representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness and that there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's errors, the defendant would not have pled guilty, but would have insisted on going to trial.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Was trial counsel ineffective for failing to object to the solicitor’s closing argument stating what uncalled witnesses would have testified to?”
    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.