Reynolds v. Hepp’s Empirical Analysis
902 F.3d 699 · 2018
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
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)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Penson v. Ohio · Coleman v. Thompson · Cuyler v. Sullivan · United States v. Cronic
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“circumstances that are so likely to prejudice the accused that the cost of litigating their effect in a particular case is unjustified.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Schmidt v. Foster
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.