Smith v. Ryan’s Empirical Analysis
813 F.3d 1175 · 2016
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · In the Matter of Samuel Winship · Lockett v. Ohio · Lindh v. Murphy · Schlup v. Delo
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“retain[ ] the essential premise and characteristic of the clinical definition cited in Atkins "); Chase v. State , 171 So.3d 463 , 471 (Miss. 2015) ("The [AAIDD and DSM-V definitions of intellectual disability] have not materially altered the diagnosis of intellectual disability [cited in Atkins ] but have provided new terminology.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Ex parte Moore“The basic premise of the Flynn effect is that because average IQ scores increase over time, a person who takes an IQ test that has not recently been normed against a representative sample of the population will receive an artificially inflated IQ score.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Pizzuto v. Blades“recognizes the existence of the Flynn Effect and recommends correcting for the age of norms in outdated tests”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Pizzuto v. Blades
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.