Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 604 A.2d 772 - State v. Holley

State v. Holley’s Empirical Analysis

1992

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
7
states following
March 2018
most recently cited

20 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently March 2018

20 state decisions

90199220002010decided

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 Batson v. Kentucky · Neil v. Biggers · Wainwright v. Witt · Hernandez v. New York · Beck v. 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““After hearing the prosecutor’s rationale, the trial justice overruled the defendant’s objection, apparently viewing the prosecutor’s reason as race-neutral. Therefore, since the trial justice accepted both the prosecutor’s explanation as satisfying the race-neutral reason for the peremptory challenge and implicitly concluded that the prosecutor did not discriminate on the basis of race or ethnicity, we cannot say that the trial justice was clearly wrong in overruling defendant’s Batson objection.” Id. at 839 (emphases added).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““must first make a prima facie showing that the [nonmoving party] has exercised peremptory challenges on the basis of race, then the burden shifts to the [non-moving party] to articulate a race-neutral reason for striking the juror(s) in question, whereupon the trial court is left to determine whether the [moving party] has carried his or her burden of proving purposeful discrimination. Batson, 476 U.S. at 96-98 , 106 S.Ct. at 1723-24 , 90 L.Ed.2d at 87-89 .” State v. Holley, 604 A.2d 772, 777 (R.I.1992). 2”
    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.