Hardy v. Chappell’s Empirical Analysis
849 F.3d 803 · 2016
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Richardson v. Perales · Williams v. Taylor · Consolidated Edison Co of New York v. National Labor Relations Board · Lindh v. Murphy
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.
“Double deference references to the layering of the reasonableness test from § 2254(d) on top of another reasonableness test, such as the deficiency prong of Strickland 's two part standard. Because only the prejudice prong is at issue here, double deference does not apply.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Apelt v. Ryan“[b]ecause the state court used the wrong standard, we need not defer to that decision.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Spreitz v. Ryan
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.