Thomas v. Varner’s Empirical Analysis
428 F.3d 491 · 2005
Citation profile
17 federal appellate · 9 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 76 later decisions — most recently November 2022 · most notably Fadiga v. Attorney General USA (2007), Thomas v. Horn (2009)
17 federal appellate · 9 district · 5 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. § 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 · Bruton v. United States · Simmons v. United States · Neil v. Biggers · Kimmelman v. Morrison
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 76 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““[i]n cases in which the record does not explicitly disclose trial counsel’s actual strategy or lack thereof (either due to lack of diligence on the part of the petitioner or due to the unavailability of counsel), the presumption may only be rebutted through a showing that no sound strategy posited by the Commonwealth could have supported the conduct.””
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he prejudice component requires [the defendant] to show “that there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different.” Strickland, 466 U.S. at 694 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 . He “need not show that counsel’s deficient performance ‘more likely than not altered the outcome in the case’ — rather, he must show only ‘a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome.’ ” Jacobs [v. Horn, 395 F.3d 92 , 105 (3d Cir.2005)] (citing Strickland, 466 U.S. at 693-94 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 ). “This standard is not a stringent one.” Id. (internal quotations omitted).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“he would likely have prevailed on the suppression motion and that, having prevailed, there is a reasonable likelihood that he would not have been convicted.”
2 later decisions 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.