Close v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
679 F.3d 714 · 2012
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Bailey v. United States · United States v. Dominguez Benitez · Smith v. United States · In re Clements
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The standard for prejudice under Strickland is virtually identical to the showing required to establish that a defendant's substantial rights were affected under plain error analysis.”) (citing Becht v. United States, 403 F.3d 541, 549 (8th Cir. 2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1177 , 126 S.Ct. 1346 , 164 L.Ed.2d 59 (2006); accord United States v. Dominguez Benitez, 542 U.S. 74, 83 , 124 S.Ct. 2333 , 159 L.Ed.2d 157 (2004); but see United States v. Bono, 26 M.J. 240 , 242 n.2 (C.M.A. 1988) (”
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.