Hooks v. Workman’s Empirical Analysis
689 F.3d 1148 · 2012
Citation profile
44 federal appellate · 5 district · 13 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2254 · 28 U.S.C. § 2243 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Jackson v. Virginia · Brady v. State of Maryland · Anderson v. City of Bessemer City · Williams v. Taylor
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 122 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States; or (2) resulted in a decision that was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State court proceeding.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[C]ounsel is strongly presumed to have rendered adequate assistance and made all significant decisions in the exercise of reasonable professional judgment.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“is limited to the record that was before the state court that adjudicated the claim on the merits.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Grant v. Royal · Goode v. Carpenter
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.