David Aparicio v. Christopher Artuz’s Empirical Analysis
269 F.3d 78 · 2001
Citation profile
51 federal appellate · 4 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 267 later decisions — most recently January 2023 · most notably United States v. Gaskin (2004), Cotto v. Herbert (2003)
51 federal appellate · 4 district · 4 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
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Blockburger v. United States · Williams v. Taylor · Coleman v. Thompson · 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 267 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[a] state court need only dispose of the petitioner's federal claim on substantive grounds, and reduce that disposition to judgment. No further articulation of its rationale or elucidation of its reasoning process is required.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Norde v. Keane · Ryan v. Miller“an unreasonable application of[ ] clearly established federal law.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Occasionally, the performance of defense counsel is so dismal that it ripens into the deprivation of counsel altogether and potentially violates the defendant's Sixth Amendment rights.”
3 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.