Engesser v. Dooley’s Empirical Analysis
2008
Citation profile
5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
October 2024
most recently cited
1 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Kimmelman v. Morrison · Lozada v. Warden, State Prison · State Ex Rel. Burns v. Erickson · State v. Engesser
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Before addressing the issues raised on appeal, we reiterate a petitioner’s burden of proof when seeking a second or subsequent habeas based on ineffective assistance of counsel claims .... We said, ‘ineffective assistance of counsel at a prior habeas proceeding is not alone enough for relief in a later habeas action. Any new effort must eventually be directed to error in the original trial or plea of guilty.’ Even though the challenge must eventually show error in the underlying trial or plea, the habeas applicant must first show that the prior habeas counsel was ineffective. Perhaps, this step has not been emphasized enough in our cases.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Engesser v. Dooley
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.