Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 443 U.S. 545 - Rose v. Mitchell

Rose v. Mitchell’s Empirical Analysis

1979

Citation profile

1,221
cited by 1,221 later decisions
81
cited 81 times by the Supreme Court
36
states following
December 2024
most recently cited

374 federal appellate · 54 district · 424 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 1,221 later decisions (81 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2024 · most notably Batson v. Kentucky (1986), United States v. Leon (1984)

374 federal appellate · 54 district · 424 state decisions — followed in 36 states

5020197919801990200020102020decided

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.

Appellate journey

reviewedMitchell v. Rose (from Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 243 · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Terry v. Ohio · Schneckloth v. Bustamonte · In the Matter of Samuel Winship · Younger v. Harris

Cited together with Castaneda v. Partida · Alexander v. Louisiana · Batson v. Kentucky · Taylor v. Louisiana · Swain v. State of Alabama

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 1,221 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Discrimination on the basis of race, odious in all aspects, is especially pernicious in the administration of justice.”
    28 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “[I]n order to show that an equal protection violation has occurred in the context of grand jury selection, the defendant must show that the procedure employed resulted in substantial underrepresentation of his race or of the identifiable group to which he belongs.”
    27 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “assume[d] without deciding that discrimination with regard to the selection of only the foreman requires that a subsequent conviction be set aside, just as if the discrimination ... had tainted the selection of the entire grand jury venire,”
    13 later decisions 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.