Osborn v. Shillinger’s Empirical Analysis
861 F.2d 612 · 1988
Citation profile
129 federal appellate · 13 district · 29 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 225 later decisions — most recently June 2018 · most notably United States v. Galloway (1995), Moore v. United States (1991)
129 federal appellate · 13 district · 29 state decisions — followed in 11 states
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. § 2243 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Anders v. California · Johnson v. Zerbst · Faretta v. California · Baker v. Carr
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 225 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A defense attorney who abandons his duty of loyalty to his client and effectively joins the state in an effort to attain a conviction or death sentence suffers from an obvious conflict of interest,”
12 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“[A]n attorney who adopts and acts on a belief that his client should be convicted `fail[s] to function in any meaningful sense as the Government's adversary.'”
12 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“'there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different.'”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.