Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2008 SD 22 - Primeaux v. Dooley

Primeaux v. Dooley’s Empirical Analysis

2008

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
June 2009
most recently cited

1 district · 3 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Batson v. Kentucky · Wainwright v. Sykes · Murray v. Carrier · Brown v. Allen

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 4 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.”
    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.