Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 465 F.3d 810 - Stanley v. Bartley

Stanley v. Bartley’s Empirical Analysis

465 F.3d 810 · 2006

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
1
states following
December 2022
most recently cited

17 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently December 2022 · most notably Mosley v. Atchison (2012), Harris v. Thompson (2012)

17 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

130200620102020decided

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

Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Williams v. Taylor · Kyles v. Whitley · Woodford v. Visciotti · Brown v. Payton

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

  1. “although this additional testimony would have affected the weight accorded the identification testimony of Stewart and Tate, the effect of the alleged deficiencies was not so significant as to cast doubt on the outcome of the trial. Therefore, we conclude that the defendant cannot establish that the outcome of the trial would have been different absent the alleged deficiencies of trial counsel....”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Having expounded the well-known standard correctly on the previous page of its opinion, it is more likely that the court stated its conclusion imprecisely than that it applied a different standard.”
    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.