Millard v. Lynaugh’s Empirical Analysis
810 F.2d 1403 · 1987
Citation profile
18 federal appellate · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 52 later decisions — most recently January 2021 · most notably Samarzia v. Clark County (1989), Trevino v. Johnson (1999)
18 federal appellate · 6 state decisions
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 · Jackson v. Virginia · Barker v. Wingo · Burks v. United States · Ohio Bureau of Employment Services v. Hodory
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 52 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Judicial scrutiny of counsel’s performance must be highly deferential. It is all too tempting for a defendant to secondguess counsel’s defense after it has proved unsuccessful, to conclude that a particular act or omission of counsel was unreasonable_ A fair assessment of attorney performance requires that every effort be made to eliminate the distorting effects of hindsight, to reconstruct the circumstances of counsel’s challenged conduct, and to evaluate the conduct from counsel’s perspective at the time. Because of the difficulties inherent in making the evaluation, a court must indulge a strong presumption that counsel’s conduct falls within the wide range of reasonable professional assistance; that is, the defendant must overcome the presumption that, under the circumstances, the challenged action ‘might be considered sound trial strategy.’ ... There are countless ways to provide effective assistance in any given case. Even the best criminal defense attorneys would not defend a particular client in the same way.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Bell v. Lynbaugh“[F]ederal consideration of a claim that a state has violated its own speedy trial rules is limited to a determination of whether the state's action has violated Petitioner's constitutional right to a speedy trial or to due process.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Flenoy v. Russell“An attack on a state habeas proceeding does not entitle the petitioner to habeas relief in respect to his conviction, as it is an attack on a proceeding collateral to the detention and not the detention itself.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Trevino v. Johnson
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.