164 F. Supp. 2d 538 - Wiggins v. Corcoran’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
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 · Williams v. Taylor · Coleman v. Thompson · Simmons v. United States · Neil v. Biggers
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States,”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“grant the writ if the state court identifies the correct governing legal principle from this Court's decisions but unreasonably applies that principle to the facts”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State court proceeding,”
2 later decisions 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.