Williams v. Washington’s Empirical Analysis
59 F.3d 673 · 1995
Citation profile
32 federal appellate · 3 district · 21 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 100 later decisions — most recently December 2017 · most notably State v. Thiel (2003), George Lindstadt v. John P. Keane, Superintendent (2001)
32 federal appellate · 3 district · 21 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
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Bruton v. United States · Picard v. Connor · Lockhart v. Fretwell · 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 100 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a petitioner may demonstrate that the cumulative effect of counsel's individual acts or omissions was [prejudicial]”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“[b]ecause investigation into this matter might have revealed evidence bearing upon credibility (which counsel believed was the sole issue in the case), the failure to investigate was not objectively reasonable.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“a 'reasonable probability' that in the absence of error the result of the proceedings would have been different, and was fundamentally unfair or unreliable.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.