Bryan v. Dugger’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 17 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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[t]his is not a case which defense counsel failed to prepare”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Lanier v. State · 727 So. 2d 216 - Rutherford v. State

2. “broad range of reasonably competent performance under prevailing professional standards.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 845 So. 2d 120 - State v. Coney · 753 So. 2d 1244 - Bryan v. State

3. “Although in hindsight Mr. Stokes might have presented his case differently to the sentencing jury, this Court does not find that his performance was below the "broad range of reasonably competent performance under prevailing professional standards." Maxwell [v. Wainwright, 490 So.2d 927, 932 (Fla. 1986)]. Furthermore, this Court finds that there is no reasonable probability of a different sentencing result had the proffered family background testimony and the live testimony of the mental health experts, both presented at the evidentiary hearing, been offered during the 1986 penalty phase. This conclusion is made also in light of the six aggravating circumstances supported by the record and the Florida Supreme Court on direct appeal.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 753 So. 2d 1244 - Bryan v. State