King v. Westbrooks’s Empirical Analysis
847 F.3d 788 · 2017
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Williams v. Taylor · Ylst v. Nunnemaker · Knowles v. Mirzayance · Cullen v. Pinholster
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) [his] counsel's performance was deficient, or put differently, 'fell below an objective standard of reasonableness'; and (2) the performance prejudiced [Lang].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Lang v. Bobby“Because the Strickland standard is already 'highly deferential,' our review of a state-court decision on a Strickland claim is 'doubly deferential' under”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Lang v. Bobby“United States v. Mahbub , 818 F.3d 213 , 230-31 (6th Cir. 2016) (quoting Strickland , 466 U.S. at 687-88 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 ).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Lang v. Bobby
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.