State v. Rhone’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 state decisions

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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Speculation after the fact about whether the State had a discriminatory purpose in exercising a peremptory challenge is unreliable. The need to speculate can be avoided entirely by requiring the State to provide a short explanation when a defendant raises a Batson challenge. . . . A bright line rule would provide clarity and certainty concerning the State's obligations in future cases and would simultaneously engender greater fidelity to Batson and its equal protection guaranty.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Meredith

2. “[t]he fact that there has been an exclusion of a single black juror is insufficient to establish a prima facie case pattern of exclusion. " 3 Verbatim Report of Proceedings (VRP) at 111 (emphasis added). But as Justice Alexander noted in his dissent in Rhone, "it is clearly inappropriate for a trial court to consider whether the jury selection process involves systematic exclusion of venire members based on a discriminatory purpose.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Meredith

3. “Adopting a bright-line rule would negate this first part of the analysis and require a prosecutor to provide an explanation every time a member of a racially cognizable group is peremptorily challenged. Such a rule is beyond the intended scope of Batson , transforming a shield against discrimination into a sword cutting against the purpose of a peremptory challenge.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Meredith