Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 816 F.2d 1493 - Adams v. Dugger

Adams v. Dugger’s Empirical Analysis

816 F.2d 1493 · 1987

Citation profile

62
cited by 62 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
4
states following
April 2018
most recently cited

21 federal appellate · 22 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 62 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2018 · most notably Dugger v. Adams (1989), State v. Broom (1988)

21 federal appellate · 22 state decisions

4301987199020002010decided

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.

Appellate journey

Relationships

Relies on In the Matter of Samuel Winship · Wainwright v. Sykes · Gregg v. Georgia · Cuyler v. Sullivan · Furman v. Georgia

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

  1. “its legal basis was not reasonably available at that time.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, you have found the defendant guilty of Murder in the First Degree as alleged in Count I of the Indictment, and guilty of Murder in the First Degree as alleged in Count II of the Indictment. As I told you, the punishment for this crime is either death, or life imprisonment. The final decision as to what punishment shall be imposed rests solely with the Judge of this Court. However the law requires that you, the jury, render to the Court an advisory sentence as to what punishment should be imposed upon the defendant.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “court has articulated a constitutional principle that had not been previously recognized but which is held to have retroactive application.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.