Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 777 F.3d 250 - Ward v. Stephens

Ward v. Stephens’s Empirical Analysis

777 F.3d 250 · 2015

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
July 2024
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3599 · 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 · Slack v. McDaniel · Miller-El v. Cockrell Director Texas Department of Criminal Justice Institutional Division · Williams v. Taylor · Brecht v. Abrahamson

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

  1. “A party cannot waive, concede, or abandon the applicable standard of review.”
    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.