United States v. Sitzmann’s Empirical Analysis
893 F.3d 811 · 2018
Citation profile
3 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Jackson v. Virginia · Brady v. State of Maryland · United States v. Olano · United States v. Bagley
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[fall] below an objective standard of reasonableness.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“when the government introduces false or misleading testimony or allows it to go uncorrected, even though the government knew or should have known that the testimony was false.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“never held that any claim of ineffective assistance of counsel ... automatically entitles a party to an evidentiary remand.”
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.