Maples v. Thomas’s Empirical Analysis
565 U.S. 266 · 2012
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 2 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 69 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2025 · most notably 132 S. Ct. 1309 - Martinez v. Ryan (2012), Martinez v. Ryan (2012)
14 federal appellate · 2 district · 7 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Coleman v. Thompson · Wainwright v. Sykes · Murray v. Carrier · Link v. Wabash Railroad
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 69 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“essential difference between a claim of attorney error, however egregious, and a claim that an attorney had essentially abandoned his client.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“would be wholly inconsistent with our system of representative litigation, in which each party is deemed bound by the acts of his lawyer-agent and is considered to have notice of all facts, notice of which can be charged upon the attorney.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“[W]hen a petitioner's postconviction attorney misses a filing deadline, the petitioner is bound by the oversight and cannot rely on it to establish cause.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Stojetz v. Ishee
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.