636 So. 2d 1069 - State v. Soler’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

105 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 106 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[a]n irregularity or error cannot be availed of after verdict unless it was objected to at the time of occurrence.”

   6 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 692 So. 2d 1222 - State v. Styles · 733 So. 2d 624 - State v. Rochon

2. “Generally, the issue of ineffective assistance of counsel is a matter more properly addressed by an application for post-conviction relief, filed initially in the trial court where a full evidentiary hearing can be conducted. State v. Prudholm, 446 So.2d 729 (La.1984). Where ineffective assistance of counsel claims have been raised by assignment of error and the record discloses sufficient evidence to rule on the merits of that claim, appellate courts have addressed the merits of those claims..... Further, in assessing a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel a two-pronged test is employed. The defendant must show that (1) his counsel's performance was deficient, and (2) the deficiency prejudiced him. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). To show prejudice, the defendant must demonstrate that, but for the unprofessional conduct, the outcome of the proceedings would have been different. Therefore, the defendant must show a reasonable probability that counsel's error so undermined the proper functioning of the adversarial process that the trial court cannot be relied upon as having produced a just result. Effective counsel has been defined to mean "not errorless counsel, and not counsel judged ineffective by hindsight, but counsel reasonably likely to render effective assistance." State v. Ratcliff, 416 So.2d 528, 531 (La.1982). Only if defendant has shown both error and prejudice will his conviction be found unreliable and set asi”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 690 So. 2d 200 - State in Interest of Or · 731 So. 2d 368 - State v. Bonnet

3. “The purpose of an expert witness, particularly in criminal cases, is to provide jurors with a basic knowledge and background on a subject, while the jury retains its ultimate role as fact finder. The jurors relate background knowledge from the expert to facts established by the evidence and make a determination as to defendant's guilt.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 759 So. 2d 980 - State v. Stokes · 904 So. 2d 838 - State v. Becnel