Redeemer v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
28 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently February 2019 · most notably Dorsey v. State (2003), Burnett v. State (2009)
28 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 · Nicholas v. United States · Hernandez v. United States · Invex Holdings, N.V. v. Equitable Life Insurance · Day 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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(b) Advice to Defendant. Except as provided by Rule 31.03, before accepting a plea of guilty, the court must address the defendant personally in open court, and inform him of, and determine that he understands, the following: 1. The nature of the charge to which the plea is offered, the mandatory minimum penalty provided by law, if any, and the maximum possible penalty provided by law; and 2. If the defendant is not represented by an attorney, that he has the right to be represented by an attorney at every stage of the proceedings against him and, if necessary, one will be appointed to represent him; and 3. That he has the right to plead not guilty or to persist in that plea if it has already been made, and that he has the right to be tried by a jury and at that trial has the right to assistance of counsel, the right to confront and cross-examine witnesses against him, and the right not to be compelled to incriminate himself; and 4. That if he pleads guilty there mil not be a further trial of any kind, so that by pleading guilty he waives the right to a trial.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Brown v. State · Weston v. State“The questions posed by the trial court and the appellant’s responses thereto, in our view, were specific enough to conclusively refute his claim that his pleas were involuntary by reason of his trial counsel’s failure to properly prepare for trial in that they reveal that he never intended to go to trial and only initially pled not guilty in order to allow his counsel time to negotiate a better plea agreement with the State. The exchange between the court and the appellant also reveals that his only source of dissatisfaction with his counsel’s representation was with the plea agreement that was negotiated with the State. As such, we find that the motion court was not clearly erroneous in its finding that the record conclusively refuted the notion that the appellant would have spurned the plea agreement and gone to trial had his counsel somehow been more adequately prepared to go to trial.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Schafer v. State“To succeed on his ineffective assistance of counsel claim based on inadequate preparation or investigation, the appellant was required to allege: (1) what information his attorney failed to discover; (2) that a reasonable investigation or preparation would have resulted in the discovery of such information; and (3) that the information would have aided or improved his position at trial.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Schafer 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.