Weeden v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
854 F.3d 1063 · 2017
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 · Williams v. Taylor · Wiggins v. Smith, Warden · Kimmelman v. Morrison · Padilla v. Kentucky
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Counsel cannot justify a failure to investigate simply by invoking strategy.... Under Strickland , counsel's investigation must determine strategy, not the other way around.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“to make reasonable investigations or to make a reasonable decision that makes particular investigations unnecessary.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“may not invent arguments the prosecution could have made”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.