Charboneau v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
702 F.3d 1132 · 2013
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2243 · 18 U.S.C. § 3509 · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Neder v. United States · Jones v. Barnes · Waller v. Georgia · Globe Newspaper Company v. Superior Court for County of Norfolk
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Experienced advocates since time beyond memory have emphasized the importance of winnowing out weaker arguments on appeal and focusing on one central issue if possible, or at most on a few key issues.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[R]eview is particularly deferential when reviewing a claim that appellate counsel failed to raise an additional issue on direct appeal.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“indulge a strong presumption that counsel's conduct falls within the wide range of reasonable professional assistance.”
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.