Jackson v. Dugger’s Empirical Analysis
931 F.2d 712 · 1991
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Witherspoon v. Illinois · Lockett v. Ohio · Eddings v. Oklahoma · Skipper v. South Carolina
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[a] Hitchcock violation is harmless error if the court can conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that the nonstatutory mitigating evidence regarding the defendant's character that was not considered by the jury would not have influenced the jury to recommend a life sentence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“First, the defendant must show that counsel's performance was deficient.... Second, the defendant must show that the deficient performance prejudiced the defense.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“insufficient mitigating circumstances as enumerated in Subsection (7) of ... Section 921.141”
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.