Doherty v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently May 2011
7 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Texas 23rd Judicial District Court)
Relationships
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Ex Parte Duffy · Ingham v. State · Ex Parte Cruz · Butler v. State
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“However, [counsel] did not stop there. Aside from his omissions, [counsel] himself made remarks prejudicial to appellant. [Counsel’s] remarks to appellant, “you didn’t take all the money?” and, “What did you do, hit him over the head first?” were heard 15-20 feet away. Fleming essentially admitted his client’s guilt in the presence and hearing of the jury. We find that, considering the totality of [counsel’s] representation of appel lant, [counsel’s] performance did not meet the standard of reasonably effective assistance of counsel.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Cueva 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.