Mitchell v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
790 F.3d 881 · 2015
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1153 · 18 U.S.C. § 1302 · 18 U.S.C. § 2119 · 18 U.S.C. § 3005 · 18 U.S.C. § 3591 (§ 60002 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994) · 18 U.S.C. § 3598 (§ 60002 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994) · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Batson v. Kentucky · Wiggins v. Smith, Warden · Penry v. Lynaugh · Bell Warden v. Cone
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Evidence that [Petitioner] was a chronic user of alcohol and drugs from a young age is the kind of 'classic mitigating evidence' that counsel must pursue at the penalty phase ....”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.