Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 184 F.3d 1112 - Wallace v. Stewart

Wallace v. Stewart’s Empirical Analysis

184 F.3d 1112 · 1999

Citation profile

70
cited by 70 later decisions
4
states following
February 2022
most recently cited

44 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 70 later decisions — most recently February 2022 · most notably Lambert v. Blodgett (2004), Silva v. Woodford (2002)

44 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

5101999200020102020decided

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

Relies on Ake v. Oklahoma · Clemons v. Mississippi · Keeney v. Tamayo-Reyes · Hendricks v. Calderon · de Kaplany v. Enomoto

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 70 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[i]t is imperative that all relevant mitigating information be unearthed for consideration at the capital sentencing phase.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “a professional responsibility to investigate and bring to the attention of mental health experts who are examining his client, facts that the experts do not request ..., at least at the sentencing phase of a capital case.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[a] lawyer who knows of but does not inform his expert witnesses about ... essential pieces of information going to the heart of the case for mitigation does not function as `counsel' under the Sixth Amendment.”
    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.