Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 813 F.2d 664 - Wilson v. Butler

Wilson v. Butler’s Empirical Analysis

813 F.2d 664 · 1987

Citation profile

51
cited by 51 later decisions
3
states following
August 2016
most recently cited

19 federal appellate · 1 district · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 51 later decisions — most recently August 2016 · most notably Zettlemoyer v. Fulcomer (1991), Smith v. Black (1990)

19 federal appellate · 1 district · 6 state decisions

2701987199020002010decided

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 · Batson v. Kentucky · Townsend v. Sain · Gregg v. Georgia · Witherspoon v. Illinois

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

  1. ““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 majority
  2. “whether the defendant had sufficient present ability to consult with his lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding, and whether he had a rational as well as factual understanding of the proceedings against him.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “positively, unequivocally and clearly generate a real, substantial and legitimate doubt as to the mental capacity of the petitioner to meaningfully participate and cooperate with counsel during a criminal trial.”
    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.