Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
13 Arkansas opinions name it 1 courts 2000–2021 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Arkansas 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 sentences2007Strickland v. Washington, supra; Burton v. State, supra. Thus, a defendant must first show that counsel’s performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness and then that counsel’s errors actually had an adverse effect on the defense. 2002Second, the defendant must show that counsel’s errors “actually had an adverse effect on the defense.” Id. (citing Strickland v. Washington, supra). | 1 | 11 |
Lee v. Stategreen2 sentences2002A defendant must show first, that counsel’s performance “fell below an objective standard of reasonableness,” Strickland, 466 U.S. at 688 , and second, that the errors “actually had an adverse effect on the defense.” Id. at 693 ; see also Lee v. State, 343 Ark. 702 , 38 S.W.3d 334 (2001). 2002A defendant must show first, that counsel’s performance “fell below an objective standard of reasonableness,” Strickland, 466 U.S. at 688 , and second, that the errors “actually had an adverse effect on the defense.” Id. at 693 ; see also Lee v. State, 343 Ark. 702 , 38 S.W.3d 334 (2001). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Arkansas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Hinton v. State
green
1 sentence2021Id. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Peebles v. State
green
2 sentences2002Sanford v. State, supra; Peebles v. State, 331 Ark. 188 , 958 S.W.2d 533 (1998). 2002Sanford v. State, supra; Peebles v. State, 331 Ark. 188 , 958 S.W.2d 533 (1998). | 1 | 2002–2002 |
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.