Harich v. Dugger’s Empirical Analysis
844 F.2d 1464 · 1988
Citation profile
55 federal appellate · 1 district · 12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 124 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2025 · most notably Dugger v. Adams (1989), Chandler v. United States (2000)
55 federal appellate · 1 district · 12 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
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Hill v. Lockhart · Townsend v. Sain · Caldwell v. Mississippi · Dobbert v. Florida
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 124 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“As you have been told, the final decision, as to what punishment shall be imposed, is the responsibility of the judge; however, it is your duty to follow the law that will now be given to you by the Court and render to the Court an advisory sentence based upon your determination as to whether sufficient aggravating circumstances exist to justify the imposition of the death penalty, and whether sufficient mitigating circumstances exist to outweigh any aggravating circumstances found to exist.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“mislead the jury as to its role in the sentencing process in a way that allows the jury to feel less responsible than it should for the sentencing decision.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"The relevant question under Caldwell is whether remarks made at trial lessened the jury’s sense of responsibility toward its role of determining whether the death penalty is appropriate.” From our perspective as members of the Court of Appeals, this necessarily involves a case, by case approach with detailed review of the entire record of any given case. The bottom line, however, is the subjective reaction of each individual judge to the language and text of the record.”
2 later decisions 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.