Willis v. Zant’s Empirical Analysis
720 F.2d 1212 · 1983
Citation profile
68 federal appellate · 3 district · 21 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 122 later decisions — most recently August 2021 · most notably McCleskey v. Kemp (1985), Horton v. Zant (1991)
68 federal appellate · 3 district · 21 state decisions — followed in 15 states
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 Jackson v. Denno · Cuyler v. Sullivan · Swain v. State of Alabama · Taylor v. Louisiana · Duren v. Missouri
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 122 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"The exclusion must have occurred `in case after case, whatever the circumstances, whatever the crime and whoever the defendant may be.' Swain , 380 U.S. at 223 , 85 S.Ct. at 837 . Petitioner is not required to show that the prosecutor always struck every black venireman offered to him, [United States v.] Pearson , 448 F.2d [1207] at 1217 [5th Cir. (1971)], but the facts must manifestly show an intent on the part of the prosecutor to disenfranchise blacks from traverse juries in criminal trials in his circuit, `to deny the Negro the same right and opportunity to participate in the administration of justice enjoyed by the white population.' Swain , 380 U.S. at 224 , 83 S.Ct. at 838 . The prosecutor's use of peremptory challenges in only a few trials is clearly insufficient to state a prima facie case, [footnote omitted] as would be a pattern of exclusion which occurred for only a few weeks."”
11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) that the group is defined and limited by some factor (i.e., that the group has a definite composition such as by race or sex); (2) that a common thread or basic similarity in attitude, ideas, or experience runs through the group; and (3) that there is a community of interest among members of the group such that the group’s interests cannot be adequately represented if the group is excluded from the jury selection process.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[w]hen the prosecutor in a county, in case after case, whatever the circumstances, whatever the crime and whoever the defendant or the victim may be, is responsible for the removal of Negroes who have been selected as qualified jurors by the jury commissioners and who have survived challenges for cause, with the result that no Negroes ever serve on petit juries, the Fourteenth Amendment claim takes on added significance.... Such proof might support a reasonable inference that Negroes are excluded from juries for reasons wholly unrelated to the outcome of the particular case on trial and that the peremptory system is being used to deny the Negro the same right and opportunity to participate in the administration of justice enjoyed by the white population. These ends the peremptory challenge is not designed to facilitate or justify.”
3 later decisions 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.