Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 849 F.2d 491 - Middleton v. Dugger

Middleton v. Dugger’s Empirical Analysis

849 F.2d 491 · 1988

Citation profile

106
cited by 106 later decisions
8
states following
October 2019
most recently cited

40 federal appellate · 30 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 106 later decisions — most recently October 2019 · most notably Chandler v. United States (2000), Brecheen v. Reynolds (1994)

40 federal appellate · 30 state decisions

5301988199020002010decided

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 · William Duane Elledge v. Richard L. Dugger · Thompson v. Wainwright · Merrell 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 106 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “First, it must be determined whether a reasonable investigation should have uncovered such mitigating evidence. If so, then a determination must be made whether the failure to put this evidence before the jury was a tactical choice by trial counsel. If so, such a choice must be given a strong presumption of correctness, and the inquiry is generally at an end. If, however, the failure to present the mitigating evidence was an oversight, and not a tactical decision, then a harmlessness review must be made to determine if there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different. Thus, it must be determined that defendant suffered actual prejudice due to the ineffectiveness of his trial counsel before relief will be granted.”
    16 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “has the potential to totally change the evidentiary picture.”
    8 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “an overwhelming amount of documentary mitigating evidence.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.