Suarez v. Dugger’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 54 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently January 2017 · most notably 568 So. 2d 1255 - Roberts v. State (1990), 734 So. 2d 1009 - Teffeteller v. Dugger (1999)
1 federal appellate · 54 state decisions
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
Relies on Octopi, Inc. v. Courtney · Connecticut Performing Arts Foundation, Inc. v. Brown · Moore v. Blackburn, Warden · 496 So. 2d 798 - Pope v. Wainwright · 441 So. 2d 1083 - Livingston v. State
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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“first, whether the alleged omissions are of such magnitude as to constitute a serious error or substantial deficiency falling measurably outside the range of professionally acceptable performance and, second, whether the deficiency in performance compromised the appellate process to such a degree as to undermine confidence in the correctness of the result.”
17 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Appellate counsel's failure `to brief an issue which is without merit is not deficient performance which falls measurably outside the range of professionally acceptable performance.'”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“on the part of the capital defendant that he would not receive a fair hearing by that judge. Id. at 192 . In this case the trial judge has publicly stated: I am inalterably opposed to any consideration for Executive Clemency and I believe the sentence of the court should be carried out as soon as possible. We must also consider that this statement was not made in a vacuum, but rather was made by a judge who had earlier been quoted publicly as saying that he believed the defendant had committed many crimes in the past and society should not let him”
1 later decision 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.