James Agan v. Richard L. Dugger, Robert Butterworth’s Empirical Analysis
835 F.2d 1337 · 1988
Citation profile
12 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently March 2013 · most notably Atkins v. Singletary (1992), Francis v. Dugger (1990)
12 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Hill v. Lockhart · Townsend v. Sain · Bonner v. City of Prichard · Dusky v. United States
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.
“Case law clearly establishes that where the facts are in dispute, the federal court in habeas corpus must hold an evidentia-ry hearing if the habeas applicant did not receive a full and fair evidentiary hearing in a state court.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Bundy 'lacks a rational understanding of what is facing him' and ... lacks 'sufficient present ability to consult with his lawyers with a reasonable degree of rational understanding'.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“A convicted defendant’s claim that counsel’s assistance was so defective as to require reversal of a conviction or death sentence has two components. First, the defendant must show that counsel’s performance was deficient. This requires showing that counsel made errors so serious that counsel was not functioning as the “counsel” guaranteed to the defendant by the Sixth Amendment. Second, the defendant must show that the deficient performance prejudiced the defense. This requires showing that counsel’s errors were so serious as to deprive the defendant of a fair trial, a trial whose result is reliable. Unless a defendant makes both showings, it cannot be said that the conviction or death sentence resulted from a breakdown in the adversary process that renders that result unreliable.”
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.