Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 47 CALAPP3D 654 - People v. Allums

People v. Allums’s Empirical Analysis

1975

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
3
states following
June 1991
most recently cited

14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently June 1991

14 state decisions

60197519801990decided

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 · 6 Cal. 3d 441 - People v. Beagle · Federal Power Commission v. Louisiana Power & Light Co. · 28 Cal. 2d 306 - People v. Peete · People v. Kelley

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

  1. “In a particular criminal case, appellate courts will not examine the reasons for the prosecutor's use of peremptory challenges. ( Swain v. Alabama (1965) 380 U.S. 202, 221-222 [ 13 L.Ed.2d 759, 773-774 , 85 S.Ct. 824 ]; In re Wells (1971) 20 Cal. App.3d 640, 647-648 [ 98 Cal. Rptr. 1 ].) Rather, the burden is on the defendant to show a systematic use of peremptory challenges to exclude blacks over a period of time. ( Swain v. Alabama, supra, at p. 227 [L.Ed.2d at pp. 776-777]; In re Wells, supra . ) In the present case, the prosecutor peremptorily challenged all the black members of the jury panel except one, who was excused for cause. However, defendant has made no showing that this is the prosecution's policy over a period of time, nor does the record reveal such a policy. Accordingly, defendant has not met his burden under Swain and Wells .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.