State v. Hoffman’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
31 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently April 2020 · most notably State v. Barden (2002), State v. Lawrence (2000)
31 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 Batson v. Kentucky · Purkett v. Elem · Avery v. State of Georgia · State v. Cummings · State v. Williams
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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[I]f the trial court requires the prosecutor to give his reasons without ruling on the question of a prima facie showing, the question of whether the defendant has made a prima facie showing becomes moot, and it becomes the responsibility of the trial court to make appropriate findings on whether the stated reasons are a credible, nondiscriminatory basis for the challenges or simply pretext.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“the defendant's race, the victim's race, the race of the key witnesses, questions and statements of the prosecutor which tend to support or refute an inference of discrimination, repeated use of peremptory challenges against [African-Americans] such that it tends to establish a pattern of strikes against [African-Americans] in the venire, the prosecution's use of a disproportionate number of peremptory challenges to strike [African-American] jurors in a single case, and the State's acceptance rate of potential [African-American] jurors.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[f]irst, the defendant must make a prima facie showing that the state exercised a race-based peremptory challenge. If the defendant makes the requisite showing, the burden shifts to the state to offer a facially valid, race- neutral explanation for the peremptory challenge. Finally, the trial court must decide whether the defendant has proved purposeful discrimination.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. James
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.