State v. Patterson’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
103 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 103 later decisions — most recently October 2020 · most notably State v. Kelsey (1998), State v. Hamilton (2001)
103 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 Irvin v. Dowd · Donnelly v. DeChristoforo · Duren v. Missouri · McCleskey v. Kemp · Patton v. Yount
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 103 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In order to establish a prima facie violation of the fair cross-section requirement, the defendant must show that 1) the group excluded is a “distinctive” group in the community; 2) the representation of this group in venires from which juries are selected is not fair and reasonable in relation to the number of such persons in the community; and 3) this underrepresentation is due to a systematic exclusion of the group in the jury selection process.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Ravenell · State v. Hill“In fact, '[t]here is no inherent right to disqualification when a member of the state attorney's office is called as a witness in a case prosecuted by a state attorney in the same office, unless actual prejudice can be shown.' " Id. (quoting 81 Am. Jur. 2d Witnesses § 229 (2004 & Supp. 2011) ). South Carolina law "places upon the moving party the burden of showing actual prejudice from the failure to disqualify.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Hawes
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.