Williams v. Trammell’s Empirical Analysis
782 F.3d 1184 · 2015
Citation profile
14 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 · Jackson v. Virginia · Coleman v. Thompson · Wainwright v. Sykes · Powell v. State of Alabama Patterson
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.
“Valdez was special because the lawyers there knew that their client was a citizen of Mexico and nonetheless failed to comply with the Vienna Convention when they failed to contact the Mexican Consulate, thereby depriving the Consulate [of] the ability to intervene and present its discovery that the defendant suffered from organic brain damage.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the Valdez exception only applies in cases involving an exceptional circumstance, and it is insufficient to overcome Oklahoma's regular and consistent application of its procedural-bar rule in the vast majority of cases.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“reweigh the evidence in aggravation against the totality of available mitigating evidence,”
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.