Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 796 F.2d 1314 - Tafero v. Wainwright

Tafero v. Wainwright’s Empirical Analysis

796 F.2d 1314 · 1986

Citation profile

50
cited by 50 later decisions
5
states following
March 2010
most recently cited

19 federal appellate · 3 district · 8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently March 2010 · most notably Lightbourne v. Dugger (1987), Jackson v. Herring (1995)

19 federal appellate · 3 district · 8 state decisions

2201986199020002010decided

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

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Jackson v. Virginia · Sumner v. Mata · Zant v. Stephens · Enmund v. Florida

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

  1. “A lawyer ... must first evaluate the potential avenues of investigation and then advise the client of their merit. A strategy of silence may be adopted only after a reasonable investigation for mitigating evidence or a reasonable decision that an investigation would be fruitless.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “First, the defendant must show that counsel's performance fell below a threshold level of competence. Second, the defendant must show that counsel's errors due to deficient performance prejudiced his defense such that the reliability of the result is undermined.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “a general verdict must be set aside if the jury was instructed that it could rely on any of two or more independent grounds, and one of those grounds is insufficient, because the verdict may have rested exclusively on the insufficient ground.”
    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.