380 Wis. 2d 246 - State v. Villegas’s Empirical Analysis
2018
Citation profile
5 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (§ 212 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Hill v. Lockhart · Tollett v. Henderson · Padilla v. Kentucky · Harrington v. Richter
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“that the plea is infirm under Bentley ... based upon 'some factor extrinsic to the plea colloquy'-like ineffective assistance of counsel.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“must prove by clear and convincing evidence that withdrawal is necessary to correct a manifest injustice.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.