Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 350 F.3d 433 - Tucker v. Ozmint

Tucker v. Ozmint’s Empirical Analysis

2003

Citation profile

30
cited by 30 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
3
states following
April 2022
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 30 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2022 · most notably United States v. Roane (2004), Reynoso v. Giurbino (2006)

5 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

210200320102020decided

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. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Williams v. Taylor · Wiggins v. Smith, Warden · Bell Warden v. Cone · Allen v. Oklahoma

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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “impose a constitutional requirement that counsel uncover every scrap of evidence that could conceivably help their client,”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “must be directly assessed for reasonableness in all the circumstances, applying a heavy measure of deference to counsel's judgments,”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “The reasonableness of the investigation depends, in part, upon the importance of the witness to the prosecution’s case: 'Although a lawyer’s failure to investigate a witness who has been identified as crucial may indicate an inadequate investigation, the failure to investigate everyone whose name happens to be mentioned by the defendant does not suggest ineffective assistance.’”
    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.