Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 347 NW2D 338 - State v. Tchida

State v. Tchida’s Empirical Analysis

1984

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
2
states following
March 2005
most recently cited

28 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently March 2005 · most notably State v. Means (1985), 177 W. Va. 650 - State v. Glover (1987)

28 state decisions

210198419902000decided

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 Gideon v. Wainwright · McMann v. Richardson · Sandstrom v. Montana · United States v. Easter · State v. Reiman

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

  1. “Ineffective assistance claims will be allowed on direct appeal only when the representation was so casual that the trial record evidences a manifest usurpation of appellant's constitutional rights.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Trial counsel’s candid preliminary statement that her experience in the practice of law was limited and that it was her feeling that someone who had practiced criminal law for a longer period would be better able to represent appellant did not overcome her presumed competency. Ineffective counsel must be demonstrated by acts or omissions which cause actual prejudice to the defense_ Inexperience alone does not mean incompetency.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “natural, probable, and usual consequences”
    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.