Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 181 SO3D 631 - State v. Lee

State v. Lee’s Empirical Analysis

2015

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
1
states following
October 2018
most recently cited

11 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Jackson v. Virginia · Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. · Williams v. Taylor · Kumho Tire Company, Ltd., et al. v. Patrick Carmichael, Etc., et al.

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.

  1. “attempt to re-litigate a claim that has been previously disposed of, by couching it as a post-conviction ineffective assistance of counsel claim, [should be] generally unavailing.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “was not a tactical decision but reflects a failure by counsel to advocate for his client's cause,”
    3 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.