Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 417 F.3d 305 - Greiner v. Wells

Greiner v. Wells’s Empirical Analysis

417 F.3d 305 · 2005

Citation profile

73
cited by 73 later decisions
4
states following
April 2020
most recently cited

15 federal appellate · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 73 later decisions — most recently April 2020 · most notably Pike v. Guarino (2007), United States v. Lin Guang (2007)

15 federal appellate · 5 state decisions

400200520102020decided

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 18 U.S.C. § 3006A (Criminal Justice Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Williams v. Taylor · Coleman v. Thompson · Wainwright v. Sykes · Cuyler v. Sullivan

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

  1. “[d]efense counsel has a 'duty to make reasonable investigations or to make a reasonable decision that makes particular investigations unnecessary.'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “[t]ime inevitably fogs the memory of busy attorneys. That inevitability does not reverse the Strickland presumption of effective performance. Without evidence establishing that counsel's strategy arose from the vagaries of ignorance, inattention or ineptitude ... Strickland 's strong presumption must stand.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[w]e cannot fault [defense counsel] for refusing to introduce evidence of [third-party culpability] in light of its 'significant potential downside' ... [namely] that it would have opened the door to a prosecution line of inquiry harmful to the defense”
    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.