Torres, Ex Parte Manuel’s Empirical Analysis
2016
Citation profile
9 state decisions
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso))
Relationships
Applies 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (§ 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1227 (§ 237 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Hill v. Lockhart · Padilla v. Kentucky · 133 S. Ct. 1103 - Chaidez v. United States · United States v. Amlani
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“An applicant for a post-conviction writ of habeas corpus bears the burden of proving his claim by a preponderance of the evidence. To demonstrate that he is entitled to post-conviction relief on the basis of ineffective assistance of counsel, an applicant must demonstrate that (1) counsel’s performance was deficient, in that it fell below an objective standard of reasonableness, and (2) the applicant was prejudiced as a result of counsel’s errors, in that, but for those errors, there is a reasonable probability of a different outcome. In the context of a collateral challenge to a guilty plea, the focus of the prejudice inquiry is on “whether counsel’s constitutionally ineffective performance affected the outcome of the plea process,” and on whether a defendant has shown that “but for counsel’s errors, he would not have pleaded guilty and would have insisted on going to trial.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"that the proper standard for determining prejudice is the one set forth in Hill , which requires an applicant to show a reasonable probability that counsel's errors affected the outcome of the plea proceedings, in the sense that, but for counsel's errors, the applicant would have rejected the plea bargain and instead pursued a trial."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Ex parte Duque · Ex parte Aguilera“Thus, where the totality of the circumstances indicate that a defendant has placed a particular emphasis on the immigration consequences of a plea in deciding whether or not to accept it, this may constitute a circumstance that weighs in favor of a finding of prejudice.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Ex parte Duque · Ex parte Aguilera
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.