601 So. 2d 161 - State v. Terry’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently February 2015
8 state decisions
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 · Horton v. Zant · 401 So. 2d 344 - Weaver v. State · Dill v. State · 437 So. 2d 491 - Storey v. Patterson
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The trial attorney concentrated on investigating guilt phase issues and failed to make a reasonable investigation and presentation of mitigating circumstances. Effective representation consistent with the Sixth Amendment involves the independent duty to investigate and prepare. Failure to investigate and failure to put on witnesses cannot be categorized as trial strategy. Counsel has a duty to exercise diligence in preparing a case for trial and in procuring witnesses. State v. Terry, 601 So.2d 161, 164 (Ala.Cr.App.1992).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““This court will not reverse a trial court’s judgment based upon ore tenus testimony unless, after consideration of all of the evidence and all reasonable inferences to be drawn therefrom, it is found to be plainly and palpably wrong. Cummings v. Hill, 518 So.2d 1246 (Ala.1987). Nor may this court substitute its judgment on the effect of the evidence dealing with pivotal questions of fact for that of the trial court. [Citation omitted.]””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. S.S.S. v. State
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.