Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 239 Ga. 409 - Patterson v. State

Patterson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1977

Citation profile

108
cited by 108 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
November 2010
most recently cited

21 federal appellate · 80 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 108 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2010 · most notably Francis v. Franklin (1985), Lamb v. Jernigan (1982)

21 federal appellate · 80 state decisions

73019771980199020002010decided

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 Mullaney v. Wilbur · Environmental Protection Agency v. Brown · Jarrell v. State · Watkins v. State · Coleman v. State

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

  1. “The conduct of the voir dire is within the discretion of the trial court, and the court’s rulings are proper absent some manifest abuse of discretion. Welch v. State, 237 Ga. 665 (5) ( 229 SE2d 390 ) (1976); Gatlin v. State, 236 Ga. 707 (2) ( 225 SE2d 224 ) (1976). Whether to strike a juror for cause lies within the discretion of the court. Welch, supra.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “The decision to grant a change of venue lies within the discretion of the trial court, and its discretion will not be disturbed absent an abuse of that discretion. Allen v. State, 235 Ga. 709, 713 ( 221 SE2d 405 ) (1975); Jarrell v. State, 234 Ga. 410, 415 ( 216 SE2d 258 ) (1975).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “These two allegedly biased jurors did not sit on the jury which convicted appellant, nor has he shown that he was prejudiced or harmed because he used peremptory strikes to eliminate the two challenged jurors.”
    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.