Wright v. Lafler’s Empirical Analysis
2007
Citation profile
1 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Williams v. Taylor · North Carolina v. Alford · Hill v. Lockhart · Brady v. United States
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Wright also asserts that his guilty plea was involuntary because his attorney gave him incorrect advice about his parole eligibility. Wright has failed to demonstrate a reasonable probability that, but for his counsel’s purportedly flawed advice, he would not have pled guilty. Wright’s counsel made a good faith effort to inform Wright of his potential sentence, and Wright’s counsel testified that Wright expressed his intent to plead guilty before there was any discussion of his guidelines range or possible sentence.”
1 later decision 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.