Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 1996 SD 64 - St. Cloud v. Class

St. Cloud v. Class’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
March 2025
most recently cited

5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently March 2025

5 state decisions

201996200020102020decided

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 Strickland v. Washington · Ohio v. Roberts · Taylor v. Louisiana · Duren v. Missouri · City of Richmond v. J. A. Croson Co.

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

  1. “[T]he defendant must show that: (1) the group excluded is a “distinct” group in the community; (2) the representation of this group in the jury pool is not fair and reasonable in relation to the number of such persons in the community; (3) this under representation is due to the systematic exclusion of the group from the jury-selection process.”
    2 later decisions 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.