Bundy v. Dugger’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 district · 2 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The question of competency calls for a basically subjective judgment. Unlike the determination of whether the death penalty is appropriate in a particular case, the competency determination depends substantially on expert analysis in a discipline fraught with subtleties and nuances. Consequently, it is this Court’s job to weigh the evidence and determine questions of credibility. Faced with a record that supports conflicting inferences, this Court must consider the opinions of the psychiatric experts in light of all surrounding circumstances and determine which opinion is more realistic and credible given the evidence presented. Further, in considering competency, the Court may rely on, in addition to expert testimony, lay witnesses testimony concerning the Petitioner’s rational behavior, and cross-examination of Petitioner’s expert.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 719 F. Supp. 409 - United States v. Rigatuso · 806 F. Supp. 1322 - Lagway v. Dallman

2. “[t]he legal test for mental competency is whether, at the time of trial and sentencing, the petitioner had 'sufficient present ability to consult with his lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding' and whether he had 'a rational as well as factual understanding of the proceedings against him.'”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Bundy v. Dugger

3. “was at all times competent to stand trial for the murder of Kimberly Diane Leach.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Bundy v. State