Mitchell v. Rose’s Empirical Analysis
570 F.2d 129 · 1978
Citation profile
13 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 1999 · most notably Rose v. Mitchell (1979), Ford v. Seabold (1988)
13 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 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.
Appellate journey
Relationships
Relies on Townsend v. Sain · Castaneda v. Partida · Strauder v. West Virginia · Alexander v. Louisiana · Hernandez v. Texas
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.
“* sis * * * * The method of establishing a prima facie case of intentional discrimination is * * * well-established when, as here, the alleged discrimination is aimed at blacks. If over a significant period of time there exists a substantial disparity between the proportion of blacks in the general population, and the proportion called to serve as grand jurors, and the selection procedure affords an opportunity to discriminate or is not racially neutral, then the [applicant] has made out a prima facie case * * *. [Footnote references omitted.]”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“While the facial constitutionality of the key man system has been upheld, it has been frequently recognized as a method particularly subject to abuse, and therefore subject to close scrutiny by the courts. We note, as has the Supreme Court on numerous occasions, that random selection methods similar to the federal system would avoid most of the potential for abuse found in the key man system, and would probably eliminate challenges such as the State of Tennessee faces here.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The foreman or forewoman is vitally important to the functioning of grand juries in Tennessee, being 'the thirteenth member of each grand jury organized during his term of office, having equal power and authority in all matters coming before the grand jury with the other members thereof.' Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-1506. He or she is expected to assist the district attorney in investigating crime, may administer oaths to all witnesses, conduct the questioning of witnesses, must indorse and sign all indictments, and like every other chairperson is in a position to guide, whether properly or improperly, the decision-making process of the body. . . .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Rose v. Mitchell
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.