8 Indiana opinions name it 2 courts 2000–2020 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Indiana 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 |
|---|---|---|
Cuyler v. Sullivangreen2 sentences2020See Gibson, 133 N.E.3d at 698-99 (comparing the presumption of prejudice standard in Cuyler v. Sullivan, 446 U.S. 335, 349-50 , 100 S. Ct. 1708, 1719 (1980), with the prejudice standard in Strickland). 2020See Gibson, 133 N.E.3d at 698-99 (comparing the presumption of prejudice standard in Cuyler v. Sullivan, 446 U.S. 335, 349-50 , 100 S. Ct. 1708, 1719 (1980), with the prejudice standard in Strickland). | 2 | 3 |
Johnson v. Stategreen2 sentences2019See, e.g., Johnson v. State, 948 N.E.2d 331, 334 (Ind. 2011) (rejecting the conflict-of-interest exception to Strickland where there was no “other client or interest to which counsel owed a [conflicting] duty of loyalty”); McGillem v. State, 516 N.E.2d 1112, 1113 (Ind. Ct. App. 1987) (applying Strickland prejudice standard despite defendant’s conflict-of- interest claim against trial counsel who also served as city attorney). 2013Johnson v. State, 948 N.E.2d 331, 335-36 (Ind.2011). | 2 | 2 |
McGillem v. Stategreen1 sentence2019See, e.g., Johnson v. State, 948 N.E.2d 331, 334 (Ind. 2011) (rejecting the conflict-of-interest exception to Strickland where there was no “other client or interest to which counsel owed a [conflicting] duty of loyalty”); McGillem v. State, 516 N.E.2d 1112, 1113 (Ind. Ct. App. 1987) (applying Strickland prejudice standard despite defendant’s conflict-of- interest claim against trial counsel who also served as city attorney). | 1 | 1 |
Shepherd v. Stategreen1 sentence2013Shepherd v. State, 924 N.E.2d 1274, 1287 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010). | 1 | 1 |
Mickens v. Taylorgreen2 sentences2011See Mickens v. Taylor, 535 U.S. 162, 167-70 , 122 S.Ct. 1237 , 152 L.Ed.2d 291 (2002) (discussing Holloway, Sullivan, and Wood). 2011See Mickens v. Taylor, 535 U.S. 162, 167-70 , 122 S.Ct. 1237 , 152 L.Ed.2d 291 (2002) (discussing Holloway, Sullivan, and Wood). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
LTV Steel Co. v. Griffin
green
1 sentence2020Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 19A-CT-1972 | September 14, 2020 Page 52 of 59 [73] In LTV Steel Co. v. Griffin, 730 N.E.2d 1251 (Ind. 2000), the Indiana Board of Safety Review dismissed charges of serious and knowing workplace safety violations against a company upon finding the state safety inspector who conducted the investigation had a conflict of interest in violation of the state ethics code. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Strickland v. Washington
green
1 sentence2019Strickland, 466 U.S. at 692 . | 1 | 2019–2019 |
The Florida Bar v. Mastrilli
neutral
1 sentence2000Id. at 1082 . | 1 | 2000–2000 |
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.