State v. Huerta’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

57 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 57 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Under the Hobson’s choice presented by the dissent, the defendant who strikes the biased juror can never show prejudice, but the defendant who leaves the biased juror on the panel waives the issue. It seems that under the dissent’s view, a party can only show reversible prejudice if the judge erroneously denies one more challenge for cause than a party has peremptory challenges. Such a holding would encourage parties to make increased efforts to demonstrate bias on the part of some of the other jurors ... [which] would lead to an ongoing trial of the jurors instead of the merits of the case. We do not wish to adopt a rule that will encourage and place a premium on such gamesmanship and nonproductive judicial proceedings.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. State v. Ibanez

2. “[B]urdening the parties with a supervisory duty over the trial court when it errs in denying a challenge for cause... eviscerates the substance of challenges for cause as well as peremptory challenges.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. 211 Wis. 2d 12 - State v. Ramos

3. “[reversal is the only feasible way to vindicate a party's 'substantial right' to peremptory challenges, which right is clearly impinged when a trial judge erroneously denies a challenge for cause.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. People v. Roldan