Luchenburg v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis
79 F.3d 388 · 1996
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently August 2010
8 federal appellate · 2 district ·
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 · Donnelly v. DeChristoforo · Smith v. Phillips · Cupp v. Naughten · Milton v. Wainwright
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“an erroneous jury charge may form the basis of a habeas petition, either independently or in conjunction with an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, where the instruction `so infected the entire trial that the resulting conviction violates due process' by rendering the trial fundamentally unfair.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Everett v. Beard
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.