Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 736 F.2d 203 - Ricalday v. Procunier

Ricalday v. Procunier’s Empirical Analysis

736 F.2d 203 · 1984

Citation profile

74
cited by 74 later decisions
4
states following
March 2020
most recently cited

26 federal appellate · 1 district · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 74 later decisions — most recently March 2020 · most notably Hernandez v. State (1986), United States v. Span (1996)

26 federal appellate · 1 district · 6 state decisions

37019841990200020102020decided

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

Relies on Strickland v. Washington · United States v. Cronic · In re Oliver · United States v. Monton · Cole v. State of Arkansas

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

  1. “[Moawad] must demonstrate 'that there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different. A reasonable probability is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome.'”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “give great deference to counsel's assistance, strongly presuming that counsel has exercised reasonable professional judgment.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “First, the [criminal] defendant must show that counsel’s performance was deficient. This requires showing that counsel made errors so serious that counsel was not functioning as the “counsel” guaranteed the defendant by the Sixth Amendment. Second, the defendant must show that the deficient performance prejudiced the defense. This requires showing that counsel’s errors were so serious as to deprive the defendant of a fair trial, a trial whose result is reliable.”
    3 later decisions 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.