State v. Martinez’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

26 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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “ignores the fact that both [j]uror[s]... were noted as having possible criminal records.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Gill · Payton v. Kearse

2. “Batson also implicitly approves inquiry into the legitimacy of the explanations because otherwise Batson would become a right without a remedy. “Rubber stamp” approval of all nonracial explanations, no matter how whimsical or fanciful, would cripple Batson’s commitment to “ensure that no citizen is disqualified from jury service because of his race.” ... Without some form of inquiry, a prosecutor could easily conceal his true reason for removing black jurors by simply inventing “neutral” reasons for the strikes____ (“[A]ny prosecutor’s office could develop a list of 10 or 15 standard reasons for striking a juror: ... ”). Batson would then merely reinstate, in another form, the “mission impossible” of Swain____ Batson surely cannot be read to produce such an anomalous result.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Stanley v. State

3. “were of the same sex and age as appellant and also had `possible' criminal records.”

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