Littlejohn v. Trammell’s Empirical Analysis
704 F.3d 817 · 2013
Citation profile
24 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Brady v. State of Maryland · Chapman v. State of California · Williams v. Taylor · Crawford v. Washington
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 52 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Every effort must be made to evaluate the conduct from counsel's perspective at the time.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Grant v. Royal · Underwood v. Royal“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.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The absence of clearly established federal law is dispositive under § 2254(d)(1)”
2 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.