Lawrence v. Armontrout’s Empirical Analysis
900 F.2d 127 · 1990
Citation profile
32 federal appellate · 2 district · 10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 61 later decisions — most recently July 2024 · most notably Bryant v. Scott (1994), Charles Adrian Foster v. Ronald Ward Wa Drew Edmondson (1999)
32 federal appellate · 2 district · 10 state decisions
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. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · United States v. Security Industrial Bank · Baxter v. Federal Communications Commission · Vanderbilt v. Texas · United States ex rel. Cross v. DeRobertis
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 61 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“demonstrate, with some precision, the content of the testimony they would have given at trial.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““A petitioner seeking relief based on ineffective assistance of counsel must ‘affirmatively prove prejudice.’ To affirmatively prove prejudice, a petitioner ordinarily must show not only that the testimony of uncalled witnesses would have been favorable, but also that those witnesses would have testified at trial. Moreover, if potential trial witnesses are not called to testify at a post-conviction review hearing, the petitioner ordinarily should explain their absence and ‘demonstrate, with some precision, the content of the testimony they would have given at trial.’ In view of these requirements, we believe that [petitioner’s] postconviction counsel also failed to exercise the skill and diligence expected of a reasonably competent attorney under similar circumstances. ””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“failure to attempt to find and interview Longstreet and Trice herself [fell] short of the diligence that a reasonably competent attorney would exercise under similar circumstances.”
2 later decisions 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.