Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 949 F.2d 884 - Lewandowski v. Makel

Lewandowski v. Makel’s Empirical Analysis

949 F.2d 884 · 1991

Citation profile

59
cited by 59 later decisions
6
states following
May 2010
most recently cited

42 federal appellate · 1 district · 8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 59 later decisions — most recently May 2010 · most notably 2 Cal. 4th 924 - In Re Alvernaz (1992), United States v. Day (1992)

42 federal appellate · 1 district · 8 state decisions

450199120002010decided

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) · 28 U.S.C. § 636

Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Hill v. Lockhart · McCleskey v. Zant · Alabama v. Smith · United States v. Morrison

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 59 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[I]n cases such as this where the question turns on the motivation of the defendant — that is, what would the defendant have done if supplied with accurate information — the amount of objective evidence will quite understandably be sparse.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. State v. Carlos
  2. “The only way to effectively repair the constitutional deprivation [the petitioner] suffered is to restore him to the position in which he would have been had the deprivation not occurred.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. Satterlee v. Wolfenbarger
  3. “because the critical evidence was testimonial”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. State v. Carlos

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.