Acker v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2001

Citation profile

cited by 3 later decisions

states following

August 2006

most recently cited

3 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Strickland v. Washington · McMann v. Richardson · 748 So. 2d 1028 - Stephens v. State · 766 So. 2d 1131 - Cabrera 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

“The standard of review as to whether counsel's performance was deficient and whether the deficiency prejudiced the defendant are mixed questions of law and fact, requiring de novo review.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. 830 So. 2d 109 - Skrandel v. State
“(1) "counsel's performance was deficient" in that "counsel was not functioning as the `counsel' guaranteed the defendant by the Sixth Amendment"; and”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. 830 So. 2d 109 - Skrandel v. State
“counsel's errors were so serious as to deprive the defendant of a fair trial, a trial whose result is reliable.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. 830 So. 2d 109 - Skrandel 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.