Campbell v. Rice’s Empirical Analysis
265 F.3d 878 · 2001
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
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 · Glasser v. United States · Williams v. Taylor · Teague v. Lane · Cuyler v. Sullivan
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the evil [of conflict-ridden counsel] is in what the advocate finds himself compelled to refrain from doing, ... [making it] difficult to judge intelligently the impact of a conflict on the attorney's representation of a client.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Mickens v. Taylor“[W]henever a trial court improperly requires joint representation over timely objection reversal is automatic”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Mickens v. Taylor“the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Mickens v. Taylor
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.