Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 371 So. 2d 751 - State v. Brown

371 So. 2d 751 - State v. Brown’s Empirical Analysis

1979

Citation profile

44
cited by 44 later decisions
7
states following
December 1991
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 40 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently December 1991 · most notably 433 So. 2d 104 - State v. Square (1983), 457 So. 2d 481 - State v. Neil (1984)

2 federal appellate · 40 state decisions

380197919801990decided

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 Swain v. State of Alabama · State v. Johnson · 341 So. 2d 847 - State v. Bennett · Reserve Life Insurance v. Bowers · 339 So. 2d 328 - State v. Haynes

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

  1. ““[1, 2] The majority of this Court has held that a defendant is not denied equal protection when the state uses peremptory challenges to exclude blacks unless there is a systematic exclusion over a period of time; we impose upon the defendant the burden of establishing a pri-ma facie showing of such exclusion. Once a defendant has done so, the state bears the burden of showing that there was no discrimination. State v. Bias, 354 So.2d 1330 (La.1978). In Bias , the Court noted its adherence to the test announced in Swain v. Alabama, 380 U.S. 202 , 85 S.Ct. 824 , 13 L.Ed.2d 959 (1965) in determining whether there was a systematic exclusion. In Swain, the United States Supreme Court held that a showing by the defense that peremptory challenges were used to exclude members of a minority in a particular case is not sufficient to establish a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause. However, where defendant can show a systematic exclusion of the minority by the state over a period of time through its use of peremptory challenges a constitutional question is presented. Swain implies that defendant must demonstrate that the prosecutor continually and consciously uses peremptory challenges to exclude blacks because of their race, requiring that the record show with ‘[some] acceptable degree of clarity ... when, how often, and under what circumstances the prosecutor alone has been responsible for striking [the minority].’ 380 U.S. at 224 , 85 S.Ct. at 838 .””
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “I have found through experience, some twenty-three years in the District Attorney's office, that blacks, where you have a black defendant, will generally vote not guilty, in spite of the strength of the state's case . . . I find, not without justification, particularly young blacks, they are very resentful of the white establishment.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.