391 So. 2d 1086 - Bridges v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

24 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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “An adequate defense in the context of the constitutional right to counsel does not mean that counsel will not commit what may later prove to be tactical errors, and matters of trial strategy, in the absence of a clear showing of improper or inadequate representation, will be left to the judgment of trial counsel.”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 439 So. 2d 190 - Minnifield v. State · 489 So. 2d 603 - Dunkins v. State

2. “"(T)he rule in this State is that, in order to have a conviction reversed because of incompetent counsel, a defendant must show that the representation by counsel was only perfunctory, that the conduct of the attorney reduced the trial to a farce, sham, or mockery of justice, or that the representation shocks the conscience of the court." Bridges v. State , 391 So.2d 1086 , 1091 (Ala.Cr.App. 1980).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 440 So. 2d 1125 - Hoppins v. State

3. “"[E]ven though it can be definitely shown that an attorney has made a mistake in the trial of a case that results in a judgment unfavorable to his client, this alone is not sufficient to demonstrate that his client has been deprived of his constitutional right to adequate and effective representation by counsel....”

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