Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 60 F.3d 383 - Holder v. Welborn

Holder v. Welborn’s Empirical Analysis

60 F.3d 383 · 1995

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
2
states following
April 2024
most recently cited

11 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently April 2024

11 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

801995200020102020decided

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

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 455

Relies on Batson v. Kentucky · Swain v. State of Alabama · Hernandez v. New York · Griffith v. Kentucky · Gregory Lumber Co. v. United States

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

  1. “[S]ince [the magistrate, the judge,] and the members of this panel all have basically been provided with only a cold record from which to determine if a Batson violation occurred at Holder's jury trial, we find that no deference is warranted under these circumstances.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(1) that he [or she] was a member of a cognizable racial group; (2) that the prosecutor exercised peremptory challenges to remove persons of the defendant’s race from the venire; and (3) that there were sufficient facts and circumstances to raise an inference that the prosecution utilized the peremptories to exclude members from the venire on the basis of race.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the trial court generally conducts the Batson inquiry contemporaneously with the voir dire procedure, and therefore is in the best position to witness the statements of the challenged jurors and to assess the credibility of the prosecutors as they seek to justify the exercise of a peremptory challenge”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.