651 So. 2d 576 - Freeman v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
25 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently August 2022 · most notably 802 So. 2d 1033 - Berry v. State (2001), Manning v. State (2000)
25 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
Relies on Batson v. Kentucky · Wainwright v. Witt · Hernandez v. New York · Powers v. Ohio · Personnel Administrator of Mass. v. Feeney
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'implies that the decisionmaker . . . selected . . . a particular course of action at least in part”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“" 'The trial court's ruling on a Batson motion will be reversed only if clearly erroneous. Nance v. State , 598 So.2d 30 , 31 (Ala.Cr.App. 1992); Jackson v. State , 594 So.2d 1289 , 1294 (Ala.Cr.App. 1991). "It is well settled that the ruling of the trial court on a Batson hearing is entitled to substantial deference and will not be disturbed on review unless it is 'clearly erroneous.' " Ex parte Bankhead , 625 So.2d 1146 (Ala. 1993). In Ex parte Branch , 526 So.2d 609 , 625-26 (Ala. 1987), the Alabama Supreme Court approved the use of a "clearly erroneous" [standard] for reviewing the factual findings by the trial court in Batson proceedings. In Bui v. State , 627 So.2d 855 (Ala. 1992), the Alabama Supreme Court said, " 'the reviewing court's inquiry . . . shall not be restricted by the mutable and often overlapping boundaries inherent within a Batson -analysis framework, but, rather, shall focus solely upon the propriety of the ultimate finding of discrimination vel non. ' Merriweather v. State , 629 So.2d 77 , 88 (Ala.Cr.App. 1993). The United States Supreme Court, in Hernandez v. New York , 500 U.S. 352 , 358 , 111 S.Ct. 1859 , 1866 [, 114 L.Ed.2d 395 ] (1991), explained the rationale for this standard of review, as follows: 'Deference to trial court's findings on the issue of discriminatory intent makes particular sense in this context because, as we noted in Batson , the finding will "largely turn on evaluation of credibility" 476 U.S., at 98 , n. 21 [ 106 S.Ct. at 1724”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[m]erely showing that the challenged party struck one or more members of a particular race is not sufficient to establish a prima facie case [of discrimination].”
2 later decisions 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.