Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 154 Wis. 2d 158 - State v. Walker

154 Wis. 2d 158 - State v. Walker’s Empirical Analysis

1990

Citation profile

80
cited by 80 later decisions
10
states following
December 2018
most recently cited

80 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 80 later decisions — most recently December 2018 · most notably 218 Wis. 2d 180 - State v. Phillips (1998), State v. St. George (2002)

80 state decisions — followed in 10 states

460199020002010decided

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 · McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · Batson v. Kentucky · Wong Sun v. United States · Katz 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 80 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[T]he defendant first must show that he is a member of a cognizable racial group and that the prosecutor has exercised peremptory challenges to remove from the venire members of the defendant's race. Second, the defendant is entitled to rely on the fact, as to which there can be no dispute, that peremptory challenges constitute a jury selection practice that permits "those to discriminate who are of a mind to discriminate." Finally, the defendant must show that these facts and any other relevant circumstances raise an inference that the prosecutor used that practice to exclude the veniremen from the petit jury on account of their race. This combination of factors in the empaneling of the petit jury, as in the selection of the venire, raises the necessary inference of purposeful discrimination.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “the evidence to which the instant objection is made has been come at by exploitation of that illegality or instead by means sufficiently distinguishable to be purged of the primary taint.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “First, the prosecutor denied that he had a discriminatory motive. The Court in Batson declared that the mere denial of discriminatory intent is not sufficient to rebut an inference of purposeful discrimination. Batson, 476 U.S. at 98 . Second, the prosecutor explained that, going into the jury selection process for Walker's trial, he only had information about jurors with juror numbers between 841 and 906. The black venireperson had a juror number of 944. The prosecutor thus stated that he struck the black venireperson because he had no information about him. This explanation is unacceptable because it is not "clear and reasonably specific." Moreover, this explanation appears to be pretex-tual.”
    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.