Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 740 F.2d 897 - Chadwick v. Green

Chadwick v. Green’s Empirical Analysis

740 F.2d 897 · 1984

Citation profile

64
cited by 64 later decisions
8
states following
March 2018
most recently cited

31 federal appellate · 12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 64 later decisions — most recently March 2018 · most notably Daniel Loconte v. Richard Dugger, Robert A. Butterworth (1988), Blanco v. Singletary (1991)

31 federal appellate · 12 state decisions

3301984199020002010decided

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 · Davis v. Alaska · Powell v. State of Alabama Patterson · United States v. Cronic · Singleton v. Wulff

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

  1. “" Cronic's presumption of prejudice applies to only a very narrow spectrum of cases where the circumstances leading to counsel's ineffectiveness are so egregious that the defendant was in effect denied any meaningful assistance at all." Chadwick v. Green, 740 F.2d 897, 901 (11th Cir.1984).”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[A]ny failure of counsel in this case to investigate and pursue all avenues of defense is best characterized as a failure by counsel in the performance of his investigatory duties, which is to be analyzed under [ Strickland ], rather than as a fundamental breakdown of the adversarial process such that prejudice is presumed under Cronic .”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “In Cronic, the Court carved a narrow exception to [Strickland 's] general rule that a defendant must demonstrate prejudice: a showing of prejudice is not necessary if there are 'circumstances that are so likely to prejudice the accused that the cost of litigating their effect in a particular case is unjustified.'”
    2 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.