Hammond v. Hall’s Empirical Analysis
586 F.3d 1289 · 2009
Citation profile
26 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
Appellate journey
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Brady v. State of Maryland · Williams v. Taylor · United States v. Bagley · Giglio v. United States
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Under the law of this circuit the question is not why [the defendant's] counsel failed to move for a mistrial ... but whether a competent attorney reasonably could have decided not to move for one.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Brewster v. Hetzel“an attorney could have reasonably believed that a new sentence hearing months in the future would open up for reconsideration some evidentiary rulings that had been made in Hammond's favor.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Brewster v. Hetzel“be instructed that Hammond had been found guilty and then would be immersed in the horrible details of the crimes he had committed.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Brewster v. Hetzel
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.