Woods v. Sinclair’s Empirical Analysis
764 F.3d 1109 · 2014
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Brady v. State of Maryland · Williams v. Taylor · Crawford v. Washington · Faretta v. California
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“show that there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Williams v. Filson“all [Woods] could offer was speculation that an evidentiary hearing might produce testimony”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Apelt v. Ryan“there [was] nothing ... in the record to suggest that such a report existed”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Apelt v. Ryan
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.