State v. Cruz’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
47 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently July 2021 · most notably State v. Bolton (1995), State v. Newell (2006)
47 state decisions
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 Batson v. Kentucky · Swain v. State of Alabama · Hernandez v. New York · Jones v. Barnes · Kuntz v. City of Dayton
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 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the state offers a facially neutral, but wholly subjective, reason for a peremptory strike, it must be coupled with some form of objective verification”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Such verification could come from the words of the prospective juror .... [or] could also be accomplished by a prosecutor’s statement concerning the facts upon which the subjective conclusion is based. This would assist the trial court in determining whether the proffered reason was truly neutral or merely pretextual ... [T]he objective verification could be the trial court’s own observations, made on the record, which might show that the prosecutor’s subjective conclusion was an appropriate reason for a facially neutral peremptory challenge.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. People v. Marion“assertion of a wholly subjective impression of a juror's perceived qualities, without more, overcomes a prima facie showing of discrimination, Batson [has] easily and quickly become a dead letter.”
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.