Williams v. Kemp’s Empirical Analysis
846 F.2d 1276 · 1988
Citation profile
21 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently August 2014 · most notably Waters v. Thomas (1995), United States v. Eyster (1991)
21 federal appellate · 3 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Gregg v. Georgia · Donnelly v. DeChristoforo · Sandstrom v. Montana · Darden v. Wainwright
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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A] reasonable probability is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“although the trial court’s instructions themselves did not focus on particular mitigating circumstances, the fact that the prosecution presented no additional evidence during the sentencing hearing while the four defense witnesses testified on Williams’ behalf ‘cast[s] an explanatory light’ on the nature and function of mitigating circumstances.” In Waters’ case, no evidence was presented during the sentencing hearing to cast an”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Waters v. Zant“In light of the admission by Williams, [his attorney's] decision not to produce contrary testimony merely fulfilled his ethical obligation to refrain from producing false or misleading evidence,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Davis v. Singletary
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.