Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 577 F.3d 1083 - Matylinsky v. Budge

Matylinsky v. Budge’s Empirical Analysis

577 F.3d 1083 · 2009

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
1
states following
December 2024
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently December 2024 · most notably Palmer v. Hendricks (2010), Treesh v. Bagley (2010)

5 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

230200920102020decided

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 · Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Jackson v. Denno · Estelle v. McGuire · United States v. Cronic

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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The Strickland standard is applicable when a petitioner claims his attorney was ineffective by denying him his constitutional right to testify.”
    1 later decision 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.