Ramonez v. Berghuis’s Empirical Analysis
490 F.3d 482 · 2007
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 49 later decisions — most recently December 2025 · most notably Davis v. Lafler (2011), Foxworth v. St. Amand (2009)
9 federal appellate · 2 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)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Williams v. Taylor · Wiggins v. Smith, Warden · Carmell v. Texas · Combs v. Coyle
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 49 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(d) An application for a writ of habeas corpus on behalf of a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court shall not be granted with respect to any claim that was adjudicated on the merits in State court proceedings unless the adjudication of that claim— a. resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States;”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he investigation leading to the choice of a so-called trial strategy must itself have been reasonably conducted lest the 'strategic' choice erected upon it rest on a rotten foundation.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[B]oth the [deficiency] and prejudice components of the ineffectiveness inquiry are mixed questions of law and fact,”
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.