McQueen v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 4 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[I]n extrapolating from some of our early and mid-20th Century opinions, the Court of Appeals cogently noted that a jury selection challenge is not waived if counsel "neither knew nor by the exercise of reasonable diligence could have known of the grounds for challenge before the jury was accepted." Bartley v. Loyall, 648 S.W.2d 873 , 876 (Ky. App. 1982) (discussing cases). ... Through the exercise of reasonable diligence, McQueen's counsel could have discovered the disqualification of Juror S.S. prior to examining the jurors. ... As such, we hold that McQueen waived his jury selection argument.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Cummings v. Commonwealth

2. “in the complete absence of any challenge to the selection of the jury panel would render RCr 9.34 's 2 waiver effective in name only, as we would then be bound to review the litigant's newly-raised challenge to the panel.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Cummings v. Commonwealth

3. “A motion raising an irregularity in the selection or summons of the jurors or formation of the jury must precede the examination of the jurors.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Cummings v. Commonwealth