Stewart v. Nix’s Empirical Analysis
31 F.3d 741 · 1994
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Keeney v. Tamayo-Reyes · Smittie v. Al Lockhart · Lawrence v. Armontrout · Stanley v. Al Lockhart
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“To establish prejudice from counsel's failure to investigate a potential witness, a petitioner must show that the witness would have testified and that their testimony 'would have probably changed the outcome of the trial.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“is entitled to an evidentiary hearing to introduce additional evidence [only] 'if he can show cause for his failure to develop the facts in state-court proceedings and actual prejudice resulting from that failure.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Williams v. Clarke“pro se status does not excuse ... failure to develop material facts in ... state-court proceedings”
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.