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.
5 Florida opinions name it 2 courts 2001–2022 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Florida 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 sentences2022See Stephens v. State, 748 So. 2d 1028 , 1033–34 (Fla.1999). “[T]here is no reason for a court deciding an effective assistance claim . . . to address both components 2 of the inquiry if the defendant makes an insufficient showing on one.” Strickland, 466 U.S. at 697 . “[A] court need not determine whether counsel’s performance was deficient before examining whether the alleged deficiency was prejudicial.” Eutzy v. State, 536 So. 2d 1014, 1015 (Fla. 1989). 2003Id. (citing Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984)). "[W]hen a defendant fails to make a showing as to one prong, it is not necessary to delve into whether he has made a showing as to the other prong." Stewart, 801 So.2d at 65 ; see also Strickland, 466 U.S. at 697 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 ("[T]here is no reason for a court deciding an effective assistance claim... to address both components of the inquiry if the defendant makes an insufficient showing on one."); Downs v. State, 740 So.2d 506 , 518 n. 19 (Fla.1999) (finding no need to address prejudice pro | 5 | 5 |
Stephens v. Stategreen2 sentences2022See Stephens v. State, 748 So. 2d 1028 , 1033–34 (Fla.1999). “[T]here is no reason for a court deciding an effective assistance claim . . . to address both components 2 of the inquiry if the defendant makes an insufficient showing on one.” Strickland, 466 U.S. at 697 . “[A] court need not determine whether counsel’s performance was deficient before examining whether the alleged deficiency was prejudicial.” Eutzy v. State, 536 So. 2d 1014, 1015 (Fla. 1989). 2002See id. "[T]here is no reason for a court deciding an effective assistance claim... to address both components of the inquiry if the defendant makes an insufficient showing on one." Strickland, 466 U.S. at 697 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 . "[A] court need not determine whether counsel's performance *409 was deficient before examining whether the alleged deficiency was prejudicial." Eutzy v. State, 536 So.2d 1014, 1015 (Fla.1989). | 2 | 2 |
Eutzy v. Stategreen2 sentences2022See Stephens v. State, 748 So. 2d 1028 , 1033–34 (Fla.1999). “[T]here is no reason for a court deciding an effective assistance claim . . . to address both components 2 of the inquiry if the defendant makes an insufficient showing on one.” Strickland, 466 U.S. at 697 . “[A] court need not determine whether counsel’s performance was deficient before examining whether the alleged deficiency was prejudicial.” Eutzy v. State, 536 So. 2d 1014, 1015 (Fla. 1989). 2002See id. "[T]here is no reason for a court deciding an effective assistance claim... to address both components of the inquiry if the defendant makes an insufficient showing on one." Strickland, 466 U.S. at 697 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 . "[A] court need not determine whether counsel's performance *409 was deficient before examining whether the alleged deficiency was prejudicial." Eutzy v. State, 536 So.2d 1014, 1015 (Fla.1989). | 2 | 2 |
Downs v. Stategreen2 sentences2003Id. (citing Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984)). "[W]hen a defendant fails to make a showing as to one prong, it is not necessary to delve into whether he has made a showing as to the other prong." Stewart, 801 So.2d at 65 ; see also Strickland, 466 U.S. at 697 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 ("[T]here is no reason for a court deciding an effective assistance claim... to address both components of the inquiry if the defendant makes an insufficient showing on one."); Downs v. State, 740 So.2d 506 , 518 n. 19 (Fla.1999) (finding no need to address prejudice pro 2003Id. (citing Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984)). "[W]hen a defendant fails to make a showing as to one prong, it is not necessary to delve into whether he has made a showing as to the other prong." Stewart, 801 So.2d at 65 ; see also Strickland, 466 U.S. at 697 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 ("[T]here is no reason for a court deciding an effective assistance claim... to address both components of the inquiry if the defendant makes an insufficient showing on one."); Downs v. State, 740 So.2d 506 , 518 n. 19 (Fla.1999) (finding no need to address prejudice pro | 1 | 3 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Stewart v. State
green
2 sentences2003Id. (citing Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984)). "[W]hen a defendant fails to make a showing as to one prong, it is not necessary to delve into whether he has made a showing as to the other prong." Stewart, 801 So.2d at 65 ; see also Strickland, 466 U.S. at 697 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 ("[T]here is no reason for a court deciding an effective assistance claim... to address both components of the inquiry if the defendant makes an insufficient showing on one."); Downs v. State, 740 So.2d 506 , 518 n. 19 (Fla.1999) (finding no need to address prejudice pro 2003Id. (citing Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984)). "[W]hen a defendant fails to make a showing as to one prong, it is not necessary to delve into whether he has made a showing as to the other prong." Stewart, 801 So.2d at 65 ; see also Strickland, 466 U.S. at 697 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 ("[T]here is no reason for a court deciding an effective assistance claim... to address both components of the inquiry if the defendant makes an insufficient showing on one."); Downs v. State, 740 So.2d 506 , 518 n. 19 (Fla.1999) (finding no need to address prejudice pro | 2 | 2003–2003 |
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.