Selsor v. Kaiser’s Empirical Analysis
22 F.3d 1029 · 1994
Citation profile
21 federal appellate · 1 district · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently September 2022 · most notably United States v. Cook (1995), United States v. McCullah (1996)
21 federal appellate · 1 district · 8 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 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Bruton v. United States · Coleman v. Thompson · Cuyler v. Sullivan · Murray v. Carrier
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 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[i]n a habitual offender case, the petitioner is actually innocent of the sentence if he can show he is innocent of the fact — i.e., the prior conviction — necessary to sentence him as an habitual offender.” Id. at 1036 . Petitioner here does not claim factual innocence of the prior convictions, but merely that he is innocent of having two convictions meeting the requirements of the career offender guideline.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he rule is not quite the per se rule of prejudice that exists for the Sixth Amendment claims mentioned above. Prejudice is presumed only if the defendant demonstrates that counsel ‘actively represented conflicting interests’ and that 'an actual conflict of interest adversely affected his lawyer’s performance.’”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[A] defendant who raised no objection at trial must demonstrate that an actual conflict of interest adversely affected his lawyer's performance.”
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.