King v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2013
Citation profile
3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
December 2018
most recently cited
3 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 94 So. 3d 452 - Hayes v. State · 8 So. 3d 1100 - The Florida Bar v. Herman · 679 So. 2d 766 - The Florida Bar v. Brakefield · Kokal v. State
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Step 1 A party objecting to the other side’s use of a peremptory challenge on racial grounds must: a) make a timely objection on that basis, b) show that the venireperson is a member of a distinct racial group, and c) request that the court ask the striking party its reason for the strike. If these initial require ments are met, the court must ask the proponent of the strike to explain the reason for the strike. Step 2 At this point, the burden of production shifts to the proponent of the strike to come forward with a race-neutral explanation. Step 3 If the explanation is facially race-neutral and the court believes that, given all the circumstances surrounding the strike, the explanation is not a pretext, the strike will be sustained.”
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.