Moody v. Quarterman’s Empirical Analysis
476 F.3d 260 · 2007
Citation profile
12 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Batson v. Kentucky · Anderson v. City of Bessemer City · Williams v. Taylor · Wainwright v. Witt · Hernandez v. New York
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) a defendant must make a prima facie showing that the prosecutor exercised his peremptory challenges on the basis of [membership in a protected group]; (2) the burden then shifts to the prosecutor to articulate a [genderj-neutral reason for striking the juror in question; and (3) the trial court must determine whether the defendant carried his burden of proving purposeful discrimination.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he district court's task was not to assess whether it agreed with the state court's ruling, but to determine whether the state court's finding [at Batson step three] was entitled to the presumption of correctness and to decide whether that determination was unreasonable in light of the evidence presented.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Grant v. Royal
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.