Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 964 F.2d 956 - Lozada v. Deeds

Lozada v. Deeds’s Empirical Analysis

964 F.2d 956 · 1992

Citation profile

71
cited by 71 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
4
states following
June 2024
most recently cited

44 federal appellate · 3 district · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 71 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2024 · most notably Roe, Warden v. Flores-Ortega (2000), Frazer v. United States (1994)

44 federal appellate · 3 district · 4 state decisions

6001992200020102020decided

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. § 2253 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Anders v. California · Powell v. State of Alabama Patterson · Barefoot v. Estelle · Johnson v. Avery

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

  1. “Prejudice is presumed under Strickland if it is established that counsel's failure to file a notice of appeal was without the petitioner's consent.”
    8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “We believe the issue of prejudice caused by the alleged denial of the right to appeal could be resolved in a different manner than the one followed by the District Court. Since Strickland , at least two Courts of Appeals have presumed prejudice in this situation. See Abels v. Kaiser, 913 F.2d 821, 823 (10th Cir.1990); Estes v. United States, 883 F.2d 645, 649 (8th Cir.1989); see also Rodriquez v. United States, 395 U.S. 327, 330 [ 89 S.Ct. 1715, 1717 , 23 L.Ed.2d 340 ] (1969).”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “The question [is] simply whether the right to appeal was wrongfully denied.”
    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.