Puckett v. Epps’s Empirical Analysis
641 F.3d 657 · 2011
Citation profile
2 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Batson v. Kentucky · Williams v. Taylor · Doyle v. Ohio · Hernandez v. New York · Harris v. Reed
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“First, the defendant must make a prima facie showing that the prosecutor’s use of peremptory challenges excluded members of a certain race from serving on the jury. Second, once the defendant makes that prima facie showing, the burden shifts to the state to provide a neutral explanation for the strikes related to the particular case being tried. Once the state offers an explanation for its challenges, the trial court must determine whether the defendant has established purposeful discrimination in the jury selection process. The ultimate burden of persuasion stays with the defendant throughout.”
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.