15 Missouri opinions name it 2 courts 1986–2021 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Missouri courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Strickland v. Washingtongreen2 sentences2014Discussion To prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, a movant must meet the two- prong test set forth in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984). 2014Discussion To prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, a movant must meet the two- prong test set forth in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984). | 3 | 5 |
Sanders v. Stategreen2 sentences1996Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687-689 , 104 S.Ct. 2052, 2064-2065 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984); Sanders v. State, 738 S.W.2d 856, 857 (Mo. banc 1987). 1994In order for defendant to prevail on his other two grounds for ineffective assistance of counsel, he must satisfy the well established two prong test set out in Sanders v. State, 738 S.W.2d 856, 857 (Mo. banc 1987). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Williamsgreen2 sentences1988State v. Williams, 717 S.W.2d 561, 564 [4] (Mo.App. 1986). 1988State v. Williams, 717 S.W.2d 561, 564 [4] (Mo.App.1986). | 2 | 2 |
Verified Application & Petition of Liberty Energy (Midstates) Corp. v. Office of Public Counselgreen1 sentence2015In re Verified Application & Petition of Liberty Energy Corp., 464 S.W.3d 520, 524 (Mo. banc 2015). | 1 | 1 |
Foster v. Stategreen1 sentence2014Foster v. State, 348 S.W.3d 158, 161 (Mo. App. E.D. 2011). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Morantgreen1 sentence1992State v. Morant, 758 S.W.2d 110, 117 (Mo.App.1988) (citation omitted). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Missouri. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Rush v. State
green
2 sentences2014Rush v. State, 366 S.W.3d 663, 666 (Mo. App. E.D. 2012). 2014Rush v. State, 366 S.W.3d 663, 666 (Mo. App. E.D. 2012). | 2 | 2014–2014 |
Zink v. State
green
1 sentence2021Zink, 278 S.W.3d at 175 . | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Beal v. State
green
1 sentence2004Id. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Jenkins v. State
green
1 sentence2003Jenkins, 9 S.W.3d at 708 ; see Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 , 104 S.Ct. 2052, 2064 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). | 1 | 2003–2003 |
State v. Seever
green
1 sentence1993Therefore, counsel’s failure to object does not constitute deficient performance and appellant fails to meet the first of the two prong test. *667 As to the improper bolstering claim, appellant cites State v. Seever, 733 S.W.2d 438 (Mo. banc 1987). | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Bass v. Nooney Co.
green
1 sentence1986Lesa Anne alternately alleges she was not a “bystander” on the theory her “injuries were directly caused by the negligent acts of respondent.” She argues that if she is not a bystander, she meets the two prong test of Bass to recover for emotional distress: (1) Shelton should have realized that his conduct created an unreasonable risk of causing the distress, and (2) the mental injury was medically diagnosable and of sufficient severity to be periodically significant. 646 S.W.2d at 772-73 . | 1 | 1986–1986 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.