Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 383 SW3D 747 - Anthony Wert v. State

Anthony Wert v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2012

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
1
states following
April 2019
most recently cited

11 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Jackson v. Virginia · Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Kimmelman v. Morrison · Stansbury v. California

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

  1. “[I] is not sufficient that the appellant show, with the benefit of hindsight, that his counsel’s actions or omissions during trial were merely of questionable competence. Mata v. State, 226 S.W.3d 425, 430 (Tex.Crim.App.2007). Rather, to establish that the attorney’s acts or omissions were outside the range of professionally competent assistance, appellant must show that counsel’s errors were so serious that he was- not functioning as counsel. Patrick v. State, 906 S.W.2d 481, 495 (1995).”
    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.