Ayestas v. Stephens’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 federal appellate ·

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

1. “a viable constitutional claim that is not procedurally barred.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Crutsinger v. Davis · Ayestas v. Davis

2. “Because we agree with the district court that there is no basis to hold trial counsel was constitutionally ineffective for failing to investigate further the possible questions of mental illness and substance abuse, [the petitioner's] state habeas counsel were not ineffective for failing to pursue that line of investigation. Raising every conceivable claim is neither required nor beneficial.”), cert. granted sub nom. Ayestas v. Davis, — U.S.-, 137 S.Ct. 1433 , 197 L.Ed.2d 647 (2017); see also Matthews v. Davis, 665 Fed.Appx. 315, 322 (5th Cir. 2016) (per curiam) (”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. John King v. Lorie Davis, Director

3. “may not consider the merits of or grant relief based on the subsequent application unless the application contains sufficient specific facts” establishing that one of three narrow exceptions applies. 3 . As the Supreme Court recently noted,”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Sorto v. Davis