Ayestas v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis
2018
Citation profile
19 federal appellate · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 75 later decisions (7 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2026 · most notably Sessions v. Dimaya (2018), Baker v. State (2019)
19 federal appellate · 4 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 15 U.S.C. § 1116 (§ 34 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act)) · 18 U.S.C. § 2518 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 3006A (Criminal Justice Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 3599 · 21 U.S.C. § 848 (§ 408 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 26 U.S.C. § 162 · 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Slack v. McDaniel · Miller-El v. Cockrell Director Texas Department of Criminal Justice Institutional Division · Williams v. Taylor · Wiggins v. Smith, Warden
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 75 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A natural consideration informing the exercise of that discretion is the likelihood that the contemplated services will help the applicant win relief.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the 'reasonably necessary' standard thus requires courts to consider the potential merit of the claims that the applicant wants to pursue, the likelihood that the services will generate useful and admissible evidence, and the prospect that the applicant will be able to clear any procedural hurdles standing in the way.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“investigative, expert, or other services ... reasonably necessary for the representation”
4 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.