United States v. Thomas’s Empirical Analysis
417 F.3d 1053 · 2005
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 4 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently May 2023
9 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (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 · Slack v. McDaniel · Boykin v. Alabama · United States v. Cronic · Bell Warden v. Cone
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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“so likely to prejudice the accused that the cost of litigating their effect in a particular case is unjustified.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Hovey v. Ayers“reserved for situations in which counsel has entirely failed to function as the client's advocate”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Hovey v. Ayers“counsel entirely fails to subject the prosecution's case to meaningful adversarial testing.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Hovey v. Ayers
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.