Ford v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
2 district · 19 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently April 2021
2 district · 19 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 · Jones v. Barnes · Mitchell 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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Ford claims that the post-conviction court unreasonably limited the use of an attorney hired to serve as an expert witness because it did not give him all volumes of the record on appeal. This argument is without merit. A review of the record shows that the expert witness was supplied with all pertinent parts of the record. We are satisfied that the expert witness had an adequate record to work with. We conclude that Ford’s remaining contentions lack merit and that the district court correctly rejected them.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Ford v. Warden“made errors so serious that counsel was not functioning as the 'counsel' guaranteed the defendant by the Sixth Amendment.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“appellate counsel is most effective when she does not raise every conceivable issue on appeal”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.