Ritchie v. Eberhart’s Empirical Analysis
11 F.3d 587 · 1993
Citation profile
9 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Coleman v. Thompson · Wainwright v. Sykes · Murray v. Carrier · Sanders v. United States
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ A petitioner cannot claim constitutionally ineffective assistance of counsel, the Coleman Court held, where the proceedings in which counsel was ineffective were not proceedings in which there was a constitutional right to counsel____ Mr. Ritchie had no constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel in the preparation of his original federal petition.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The abuse of the writ doctrine is codified ... in two enactments of equal status: Rule 9(b) and 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“point to a constitutional violation that probably resulted in the conviction of one who was actually innocent.”
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.