766 So. 2d 860 - Thomas v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 47 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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““As to claims of ineffective appellate counsel, an appellant has a clear right to effective assistance of counsel on first appeal. Evitts v. Lucey, 469 U.S. 387 , 105 S.Ct. 830 , 83 L.Ed.2d 821 (1985). However, appellate counsel has no constitutional obligation to raise every non-frivolous issue. Jones v. Barnes, 463 U.S. 745 , 103 S.Ct. 3308 , 77 L.Ed.2d 987 (1983). The United States Supreme Court has recognized that ‘[experienced advocates since time beyond memory have emphasized the importance of winnowing out weaker arguments on appeal and focusing on one central issue if possible, or at most on a few key issues.’ Jones v. Barnes, 463 U.S. at 751-52 , 103 S.Ct. 3308 . Such a winnowing process ‘far from being evidence of incompetence, is the hallmark of effective advocacy.’ Smith v. Murray, 477 U.S. 527, 536 , 106 S.Ct. 2661 , 91 L.Ed.2d 434 (1986). Appellate counsel is presumed to exercise sound strategy in the selection of issues most likely to afford relief on appeal. Pruett v. Thompson, 996 F.2d 1560, 1568 (4th Cir.1993), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 984 , 114 S.Ct. 487 , 126 L.Ed.2d 437 (1993). One claiming ineffective appellate counsel must show prejudice, i.e., the reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s errors, the petitioner would have prevailed on appeal. Miller v. Keeney, 882 F.2d 1428 , 1434 and n. 9 (9th Cir.1989).””

   6 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Woods v. State · Reeves v. State

2. “"However, Thomas has failed to establish the two prongs of Strickland v. Washington . In implicitly rejecting the underlying substantive issue as failing to present any plain error, Rule 45A, Ala. R.App.P., the Alabama Supreme Court implicitly found that the alleged error did not or probably did not adversely affect the substantial right of Thomas. Thus, we must concur with the attorney general that Thomas's ineffective trial counsel argument fails because, by virtue of the Alabama Supreme Court's implicit ruling, Thomas cannot satisfy the prejudice prong of Strickland . " [5]”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Hunt v. State · Williams v. State

3. “`claims of failure to investigate must show with specificity what information would have been obtained with investigation, and whether, assuming the evidence is admissible, its admission would have produced a different result.'”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 957 So. 2d 492 - Woods v. State · 71 So. 3d 12 - Smith v. State