528 F. Supp. 2d 77 - Schulz v. Marshall’s Empirical Analysis
2007
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Williams v. Taylor · McMann v. Richardson · Wiggins v. Smith, Warden · 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[w]ith respect to alibi witnesses in particular, courts have found that even if ... alibi evidence did exist, the trial attorney's decision not to call the purported alibi witnesses was a tactical decision that does not constitute deficient performance”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Hughes v. Sheahan“In evaluating claims of ineffective assistance of counsel based on failure to investigate witnesses, courts place weight on a defendant's ability to show that these witnesses would have had helpful information.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Hughes v. Sheahan“Courts applying Strickland are especially deferential to defense attorneys' decisions concerning which witnesses to put before the jury.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Hughes v. Sheahan
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.