Elem v. Purkett’s Empirical Analysis
64 F.3d 1195 · 1995
Citation profile
12 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently December 2018
12 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 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.
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Texas Department of Community Affairs v. Burdine · Batson v. Kentucky · Hernandez v. New York · Purkett v. Elem · Marshall v. Lonberger
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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“implausible reasons may be legitimate, and, therefore, as long as the reason is facially neutral, `it must be deemed sufficient at this second stage, even if it bears no relation whatsoever to the case to be tried or the person's ability to serve as a juror.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“When petitioner’s counsel objected to the prosecutor’s use of peremptory strikes to eliminate jurors 22 and 24, the trial judge noted, and then the prosecutor argued, that there was no evidence that jurors 22 and 24 were in fact African American. The prosecutor nonetheless stated that he struck jurors 22 and 24 because of their mustaches and beards, which “look[ed] suspicious,” and because of their hair, which the prosecutor “[didn’t] like.” Responding to the trial court’s comment and the prosecutor’s responsive argument, the defense attorney requested that the court either allow him to ask the two jurors if they were black or take judicial notice of the fact that they were black, in order to establish a record of the jurors’ race. The trial court responded, “I am not going to do that, no, sir.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Moody v. Quarterman“because the prosecutor proffered reasons for striking juror 22 that were facially race-neutral, and petitioner made no attempt to persuade the state trial court that the prosecutor’s reasons for striking juror 22 were merely a pretext for purposeful discrimination, the trial court’s finding of no racial motive is fairly supported by the record, and petitioner is not entitled to habeas relief on his Batson claim.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Moody v. Quarterman
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.