LOZADA’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
192 federal appellate · 5 district · 9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 1,166 later decisions — most recently December 2025 · most notably Shobna Chandar Lata v. Immigration and Naturalization Service (2000), Iturribarria v. Immigration & Naturalization Service (2003)
192 federal appellate · 5 district · 9 state decisions
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 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (§ 212 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1251 (§ 241 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1254 (§ 244 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Rafeal Ramirez-Durazo, Rosa Isela Lopez De Ramirez, Luz Maria Ramirez-Alcaraz, Maria Sara Ramirez-Alcaraz v. Immigration and Naturalization Service · Elvira Magallanes-Damian v. Immigration & Naturalization Service, Monica Gallegos-Ares v. Immigration & Naturalization Service, Marisol Montero v. Immigration & Naturalization Service, Candalaria Garcia-Quesada v. Immigration & Naturalization Service, Jose Gallegos-Arrez v. Immigration & Naturalization Service, Engracia Saucedo-De Gallegos v. Immigration & Naturalization Service, Lucia Solis De Garcia v. Immigration & Naturalization Service · Lopez v. Immigration & Naturalization Service · Paul v. United States Immigration & Naturalization Service · Mohsseni Behbahani v. Immigration & Naturalization Service
Cited together with Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Doherty · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Abudu · Stone v. Immigration & Naturalization Service · Reyes v. Ashcroft · Lozada v. Immigration & Naturalization Service
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 1,166 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A motion based upon a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel should be supported by an affidavit of the allegedly aggrieved respondent attesting to the relevant facts. In the case before us, that affidavit should include a statement that sets forth in detail the agreement that was entered into with former counsel with respect to the actions to be taken on appeal and what counsel did or did not represent to the respondent in this regard. Furthermore, before allegations of ineffective assistance of former counsel are presented to the Board, former counsel must be informed of the allegations and allowed the opportunity to respond. Any subsequent response from counsel, or report of counsel’s failure or refusal to respond, should be submitted with the motion. Finally, if it is asserted that prior counsel’s handling of the case involved a violation of ethical or legal responsibilities, the motion should reflect whether a complaint has been filed with appropriate disciplinary authorities regarding such representation, and if not, why not.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“necessary if we are to have a basis for assessing the substantial number of claims of ineffective assistance of counsel that come before the Board.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“Any right a respondent in deportation proceedings may have to counsel is grounded in the fifth amendment guarantee of due process.... Ineffective assistance of counsel in a deportation proceeding is a denial of due process only if the proceeding was so fundamentally unfair that the alien was prevented from reasonably presenting his case.... One must show, moreover, that he was prejudiced by his representative’s performance.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.