748 So. 2d 1028 - Stephens v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 176 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 178 later decisions — most recently July 2021 · most notably 803 So. 2d 598 - Connor v. State (2001), 768 So. 2d 1037 - Occhicone v. State (2000)
1 federal appellate · 176 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 · Ornelas v. United States · Miller v. Fenton · United States v. Bajakajian · 334 So. 2d 13 - Shaw v. Shaw
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 178 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Thus, under Strickland , both the performance and prejudice prongs are mixed questions of law and fact, with deference to be given only to the lower court's factual findings.”
28 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Wilson v. State · Walker v. State“First, the defendant must show that counsel's performance was deficient. This requires showing that counsel made errors so serious that counsel was not functioning as the "counsel" guaranteed the defendant by the Sixth Amendment. Second, the defendant must show that the deficient performance prejudiced the defense. This requires showing that counsel's errors were so serious as to deprive the defendant of a fair trial, a trial whose result is reliable. Unless a defendant makes both showings, it cannot be said that the conviction or death sentence resulted from a breakdown in the adversary process that renders the result unreliable.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Griffin v. State · Preston v. State“The State takes the position, and we agree, that the `competent substantial evidence' standard announced in Grossman [ v. State, 708 So.2d 249 (Fla.1997),] applies to the trial court's factual findings.”
3 later decisions 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.