Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2000 SD 69 - State v. Blem

State v. Blem’s Empirical Analysis

2000

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
3
states following
August 2023
most recently cited

15 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently August 2023

15 state decisions

60200020102020decided

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 Arizona v. Fulminante · State v. LaMere · State v. Nelson · State v. Knecht · 110 Wis. 2d 661 - State v. Billings

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

  1. “that the South Dakota statutory procedures 'establish objective methods for the random selection of trial jurors' in South Dakota. 'These objective procedures, by seeking to eliminate as far as possible the vagaries of human subjectivity and arbitrariness from the jury selection process, secure a defendant's fundamental right to an impartial jury[.]' " Id. (quoting LaMere , 2 P.3d at 214 ). "[B]ecause no examination of the prospective jurors was conducted prior to their removal,”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “[n]either side, including the State, is entitled to the exclusion of particular jurors prior to the commencement of the voir dire process.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “opportunity to determine that these prospective jurors were not biased and should not be removed for cause.”
    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.