Bryan v. Singletary’s Empirical Analysis
140 F.3d 1354 · 1998
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1915 · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Caldwell v. Mississippi · Ake v. Oklahoma · Webster v. Reproductive Health Services · Rogers v. Zant
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the failure to present psychiatric testimony may not be prejudicial to the defendant, especially so in this case where the substance of Bryan's health problems was in fact before the jury, and where conclusions of experts which Bryan now proffers are inconsistent with Bryan's actions in implementing a complicated murder scheme and his elaborate attempts to cover his tracks.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[b]ecause Bryan cannot satisfy the prejudice prong, we need not address the performance prong”
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.