Bustos v. White’s Empirical Analysis
521 F.3d 321 · 2008
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Anders v. California · Boykin v. Alabama · Williams v. Taylor · Hill v. Lockhart
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“any Supreme Court precedent clearly establishing the proposition that an attorney’s representation is constitutionally deficient when he fails to alert a defendant considering pleading guilty that he will not be eligible for parole,” that”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Baum v. Rushton“although the Supreme Court had not addressed whether a parole-ineligible defendant must be advised of his parole ineligibility before pleading guilty, the Fourth Circuit had concluded that such a defendant must be so advised.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Baum v. Rushton
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.