State v. Oswald’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently July 2021
17 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 Strickland v. Washington · Faretta v. California · Griffin v. People of the State of Illinois · Britt v. North Carolina · State v. Pettit
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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[E]xclusion of a juror for objective bias requires a direct, critical, personal connection between the individual juror and crucial evidence or a dispositive issue in the case to be tried or the juror's intractable negative attitude toward the justice system in general.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[I]t is clear that "a prospective juror need not respond to voir dire questions with unequivocal declarations of impartiality." It is not just the juror's words that are important. The manner in which the juror says the words and the body language he or she exhibits while answering speak volumes-volumes that are not transmitted to a reviewing court via the cold record. Our inability to review demeanor and thus assess sincerity is precisely why we leave the determination of subjective bias to the circuit court. Thus, when reviewing a circuit court's decision on subjective bias, we do not focus on particular, isolated words the juror used. Rather, we look at the record as a whole, using a very deferential lens, to determine if it supports the circuit court's conclusion.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“In [.Faucher and other cases published at the same time], the court clarified the previously turbid state of juror bias jurisprudence in Wisconsin, adopting the terms 'statutory,1 'subjective' and 'objective' bias to replace the misused 'implied,' 'actual' and 'inferred' bias terminology.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Funk
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.