Crandell v. Bunnell’s Empirical Analysis
144 F.3d 1213 · 1998
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently August 2015 · most notably Wayne Dale Schell v. Larry Witek Bill Lockyer (2000), United States v. Santos (2000)
10 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Brecht v. Abrahamson · Teague v. Lane · Lindh v. Murphy · Michel v. State of Louisiana Poret
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) timeliness of the motion; (2) adequacy of the court's inquiry into the defendant's complaint; and (3) whether the conflict between the defendant and his attorney was so great that it resulted in a total lack of communication preventing an adequate defense.”
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.