947 F. Supp. 1021 - Adanandus v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
5
cited by 5 later decisions
April 2002
most recently cited
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Anders v. California · Penson v. Ohio · Hill v. Lockhart · Darden v. Wainwright
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Counsel cannot be deficient for failing to press a frivolous point.”; United States v. Gibson, 55 F.3d 173, 179 (5th Cir.1995);”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Cordova v. Johnson
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.