Dickerson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

13 state decisions

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.

1. “We, the Jury, unanimously find from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the following facts existed at the time of the commission of the Capital Murder. Section A: That the Defendant contemplated that lethal force would be employed. Next we, the jury, unanimously find that the aggravating circumstances of: 1. The Capital offense was committed when the Defendant was engaged in the commission of, or an attempt to commit, or flight after committing or attempting to commit, a Kidnapping. 2. The Capital offense was especially heinous, atrocious or cruel. Exists beyond a reasonable doubt and is sufficient to impose the death penalty and that there are insufficient mitigating circumstances to outweigh the aggravating circumstances, and we further find unanimously that the Defendant should suffer death.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Abdur Rahim Ambrose v. State of Mississippi

2. “Following Enmund v. Florida , Mississippi amended its capital sentencing scheme to require that a jury must find that the defendant actually killed, attempted to kill, intended that a killing take place, and/or contemplated that lethal force would be employed in order to return and impose a sentence of death. Ch. 429, Senate Bill No. 2699, 1983 General Laws of Mississippi.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Abdur Rahim Ambrose v. State of Mississippi

3. “(1) who is'able to perceive and understand the nature of the proceedings; (2) who is able to rationally communicate with his attorney about the case; (3) who is able to recall relevant facts; (4) who is able to testify in his own defense if appropriate; and (5) whose, ability to satisfy the foregoing criteria is commensurate with the severity of the case.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Hutto v. State