445 So. 2d 323 - Smith v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 46 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 51 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Issues which either were or could have been litigated at trial and upon direct appeal are not cognizable through collateral attack.”

   12 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Rodriguez v. State · Power v. State

2. “"When ineffective assistance of counsel is asserted, the burden is on the appellant to specifically allege and establish grounds for relief and to establish whether such grounds resulted in prejudice to him. Meeks v. State, [ 382 So.2d 673 (Fla.1980)]. This Court set standards for assessing whether the performance of counsel in a given situation amounts to legal incompetency in Knight v. State, 394 So.2d 997, 1001 (Fla.1981). We adopted the following four principles to make this determination. First, the specific omission or overt act upon which the claim of ineffective assistance of counsel is based must be detailed in the appropriate pleading. Second, the defendant has the burden to show that this specific omission or overt act was a substantial and serious deficiency measurably below that of competent counsel. In making this second determination, the performance of counsel must be judged in light of the totality of the circumstances. Meeks v. State . Third, the defendant has the burden to show that this deficiency, when considered under the circumstances of his case, was substantial enough to demonstrate a prejudice to the defendant to the extent that there is a likelihood that the deficient conduct affected the outcome of the court proceedings. Fourth, in the event a defendant does show a substantial deficiency and presents a prima facie showing of prejudice, the state still has the opportunity to rebut those assertions by showing beyond a reasonable doubt that there was ”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Nelson v. State · 748 So. 2d 328 - Cunningham v. State

3. “Nothing has been shown to this Court concerning what evidence would have been discovered had counsel not failed to do the specific acts which appellant claims constitute ineffective assistance of counsel.”

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