Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 159 N.C. App. 252 - State v. Wiggins

159 N.C. App. 252 - State v. Wiggins’s Empirical Analysis

2003

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
July 2018
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 16 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Batson v. Kentucky · Chambers v. Mississippi · Hernandez v. New York · Purkett v. Elem · Mills 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “(1) the characteristic in question of the defendant, the victim and any key witnesses; (2) questions and comments made by the prosecutor during jury selection which tend to support or contradict an inference of discrimination based upon the characteristic in question; (3) the frequent exercise of peremptory challenges to prospective jurors with the characteristic in question that tends to establish a pattern, or the use of a disproportionate number of peremptory challenges against venire members with the characteristic in question; (4) whether the State exercised all of its peremptory challenges; and, (5) the ultimate makeup of the jury in light of the characteristic in question.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “outlined a three-step process for evaluating claims that a prosecutor has used peremptory challenges in a manner violating the Equal Protection Clause. . . . First, the defendant must make a prima facie showing that the prosecutor has exercised peremptory challenges on the basis of race. Second, if the requisite showing has been made, the burden shifts to the prosecutor to articulate a race-neutral explanation for striking the jurors in question. Finally, the trial court must determine whether the defendant has carried his burden of proving purposeful discrimination.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “"The burden is on the defendant to establish a mitigating factor by a preponderance of the evidence." The trial court must find a mitigating factor where evidence to support the factor is substantial, credible, and uncontradicted. To establish error on appeal, defendant "must show that the evidence so clearly establishes the fact in issue that no reasonable inferences to the contrary can be drawn and that the credibility of the evidence [to support the mitigating factor] is manifest as a matter of law."”
    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.