Williams v. Stephens’s Empirical Analysis
761 F.3d 561 · 2014
Citation profile
2 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Miller-El v. Cockrell Director Texas Department of Criminal Justice Institutional Division · Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. · Williams v. Taylor · Atkins v. Virginia
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“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,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Weathers v. Davis“resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Weathers v. Davis
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.