Nunnemaker v. Ylst’s Empirical Analysis
904 F.2d 473 · 1990
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Appellate journey
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (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 · Wainwright v. Sykes · McMann v. Richardson · Michigan v. Long · Engle v. Isaac
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Nunnemaker has not shown that his trial counsel's performance 'was not within the range of competence demanded of attorneys in criminal cases.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“was based on a procedural default rather than on the underlying merits of Nunnemaker's claims.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Ylst v. Nunnemaker“clearly and expressly state its reliance on Nunnemaker's procedural default,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Ylst v. Nunnemaker
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.