Commonwealth v. Chleikh’s Empirical Analysis
2012
Citation profile
12 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (§ 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1227 (§ 237 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1229B (§ 240a of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Hill v. Lockhart · Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Enrico St Cyr · Padilla v. Kentucky · Commonwealth v. Saferian
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Thus, a defendant must prove both deficient performance and prejudice.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“It is quintessentially the duty of counsel to provide her client with available advice about an issue like deportation and the failure to do so 'clearly satisfies the first prong of the Strickland [ Strickland v. United States , 466 U.S. 668 (1984) ] analysis.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“extensive ties or connections that might warrant a rational willingness to 'roll the dice' and opt for a trial, rather than to accept a plea bargain”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.