State v. Rhone’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Adopting a bright-line rule would negate this first part of the analysis and require a prosecutor to provide an explanation every time a member of a racially cognizable group is peremptorily challenged. Such a rule is beyond the intended scope of Batson , transforming a shield against discrimination into a sword cutting against the purpose of a peremptory challenge.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Meredith · Watson v. State

2. “(1) [S]triking a group of otherwise heterogeneous venire members who have race as their only common characteristic, (2) exercising a disproportionate use of strikes against a group, (3) the level of a group's representation in the venire as compared to the jury, (4) the race of the defendant and the victim, (5) past discriminatory use of peremptory challenges by the prosecuting attorney, (6) the type and manner of the prosecuting attorney's questions during voir dire, (7) disparate impact of using all or most of the challenges to remove minorities from the jury, and (8) similarities between those individuals who remain on the jury and those who have been struck.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Meredith · State v. Meredith

3. “Speculation after the fact about whether the State had a discriminatory purpose in exercising a peremptory challenge is unreliable. The need to speculate can be avoided entirely by requiring the State to provide a short explanation when a defendant raises a Batson challenge. . . . A bright line rule would provide clarity and certainty concerning the State's obligations in future cases and would simultaneously engender greater fidelity to Batson and its equal protection guaranty.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Meredith