High v. Kemp’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

22 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Jose High and his accomplices, Nathan Brown and Judson Ruffin, robbed a service station in [Crawfordville, Georgia] on July 26,1976. The station operator (Henry Lee Phillips) and his eleven-year-old stepson (Bonnie Bullock) 2 were abducted during the course of the robbery. Phillips was placed in the trunk of Ruffin’s ear; Bonnie Bullock was placed in the back seat. High and his accomplices drove the two to a remote site where they were to be eliminated. The eleven-year old was taunted by High as they rode in the back seat of the car: “Are you ready to die? Do you want to die? Well, you’re going to die.” The child begged for his life. Upon reaching a deserted wooded area, the victims were forced to lie face down in front of the car. The victims were then shot by the three defendants. Bonnie Bullock died of a bullet wound to the head. Phillips suffered a gun shot wound to the head and wrist. Having been left for dead, Phillips miraculously survived and later identified High, Ruffin, and Brown. High later confessed to the murder.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Martinez High v. Turpin

2. “although the trial court’s instructions themselves did not focus on particular mitigating circumstances, the fact that the prosecution presented no additional evidence during the sentencing hearing while the four defense witnesses testified on Williams’ behalf ‘cast[s] an explanatory light’ on the nature and function of mitigating circumstances.” In Waters’ case, no evidence was presented during the sentencing hearing to cast an”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Waters v. Zant

3. “The only distinguishing factor between the instructions given here and the instructions held to be adequate in the Peek decision is that the trial judge in Peek gave concrete examples of a mitigating and aggravating factor. Had this been done at High’s trial, such an instruction would have emphasized the fact that there were no mitigating circumstances to be found.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Martinez High v. Turpin