Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 740 F.2d 1344 - Knighton v. Maggio

Knighton v. Maggio’s Empirical Analysis

740 F.2d 1344 · 1984

Citation profile

63
cited by 63 later decisions
3
states following
December 2003
most recently cited

27 federal appellate · 12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 63 later decisions — most recently December 2003 · most notably Elliott v. Perez (1985), Mattheson v. King (1985)

27 federal appellate · 12 state decisions

460198419902000decided

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

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Gregg v. Georgia · Witherspoon v. Illinois · Furman v. Georgia · Engle v. Isaac

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

  1. “indulge a strong presumption that counsel's conduct falls within the wide range of reasonable professional assistance; that is, the defendant must overcome the presumption that, under the circumstances, the challenged action 'might be considered sound trial strategy.'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “First, the defendant must show that counsel’s performance was deficient ... 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.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “One claiming ineffective assistance of counsel must identify specific acts or omissions; general statements and conclusionary charges will not suffice.”
    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.