Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 614 F.3d 987 - Cheney v. Washington

Cheney v. Washington’s Empirical Analysis

614 F.3d 987 · 2010

Citation profile

35
cited by 35 later decisions
December 2024
most recently cited

14 federal appellate · 3 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently December 2024 · most notably United States v. Stinson (2011), Doody v. Ryan (2011)

14 federal appellate · 3 district ·

31020102020decided

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 · Williams v. Taylor · United States v. Young · Darden v. Wainwright · Richardson v. Marsh

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

  1. “Because judicial application of a general standard "can demand a substantial element of judgment," the more general the rule provided by the Supreme Court, the more latitude the state courts have in reaching reasonable outcomes in case-by-case determinations. Yarborough v. Alvarado , 541 U.S. 652 , 664 [ 124 S.Ct. 2140 , 158 L.Ed.2d 938 ] (2004). In turn, the state courts' greater leeway in reasonably applying a general rule translates to a narrower range of decisions that are objectively unreasonable under AEDPA. Accordingly, we review a state court's decision applying Strickland 's general principles with increased, or double, deference.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The pivotal question is whether the state court's application of the Strickland standard was unreasonable. This is different from asking whether defense counsel's performance fell below Strickland 's standard.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[t]he trial court instructed the jurors several times that their decision was to be made on the basis of the evidence alone, and that the arguments of counsel were not evidence.”
    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.