Miller v. Mullin’s Empirical Analysis
354 F.3d 1288 · 2004
Citation profile
20 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 37 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2025 · most notably Smith v. Mullin (2004), Turrentine v. Mullin (2004)
20 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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) · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. · Williams v. Taylor · Wiggins v. Smith, Warden · Donnelly v. DeChristoforo
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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[I]f the issue is meritless, its omission will not constitute deficient performance.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The district court required the government to lay a foundation for Dr. Stratbucker’s testimony by eliciting his qualifications and previous research on the effects of stun guns on the human body. In a written order explaining the reasons for admitting Dr. Stratbucker’s testimony, the district court applied Federal Rule of Evidence 702 and the applicable Supreme Court decisions, appropriately describing the requirements of that rule. We are satisfied that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting Dr. Stratbucker’s testimony.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“A claim of appellate ineffectiveness can be based on counsel's failure to raise a particular issue on appeal, although it is difficult to show deficient performance under those circumstances because counsel `need not (and should not) raise every nonfrivolous claim, but rather may select from among them in order to maximize the likelihood of success on appeal.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Sperry v. McKune
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.