Flowers v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2014
Citation profile
4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
July 2018
most recently cited
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Batson v. Kentucky · Lilly v. Virginia · 691 So. 2d 948 - Herring v. State · 517 So. 2d 1346 - Lockett 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) he is a member of a cognizable racial group; (b) the non-objecting party exercised peremptory challenges to remove venire members [of a different race from the defendant]; and (c) these facts and any other relevant circumstances raise an inference that the non-objecting party used that practice to exclude ■ the venire [members] from the petit jury on account of their race.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“jurors are allowed latitude in deriving facts from each witness's assertions[ ] and ... must determine the value of the conflicting testimony introduced during the trial.”
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.