Commonwealth v. Edwards’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “A Batson claim presents mixed questions of law and fact. Therefore, our standard of review is whether the trial court's legal conclusions are correct and whether its factual findings are clearly erroneous. In Batson , the [Supreme Court of the United States] held that a prosecutor's challenge to potential jurors solely on the basis of race violates the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution. When a defendant makes a Batson challenge during jury selection: First, the defendant must make a prima facie showing that the circumstances give rise to an inference that the prosecutor struck one or more prospective jurors on account of race; second, if the prima facie showing is made, the burden shifts to the prosecutor to articulate a race-neutral explanation for striking the juror(s) at issue; and third, the trial court must then make the ultimate determination of whether the defense has carried its burden of proving purposeful discrimination.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Commonwealth v. Scott

2. “The trial court should consider the totality of circumstances when determining whether the prosecutor acted with discriminatory intent or engaged in purposeful discrimination.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Commonwealth v. Scott