Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 720 So. 2d 186 - Magee v. State

720 So. 2d 186 - Magee v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

17
cited by 17 later decisions
2
states following
August 2011
most recently cited

17 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently August 2011

17 state decisions

140199820002010decided

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 · Hernandez v. New York · 697 So. 2d 777 - Coleman v. State · 517 So. 2d 1346 - Lockett v. State · United States v. Forbes

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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “First, the defendant must establish a prima facie case that race was the criteria for the exercise of the peremptory challenge . . . . Second, should the defendant make such a showing, the striking party then has the burden to state a racially neutral explanation for the challenged strike. If a racially neutral explanation is offered, the defendant may rebut the explanation. Finally, the trial court must make a finding of fact to determine if the defendant has proved purposeful discrimination.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Striking a juror because of the conviction or charge of a family member is a valid, race-neutral reason to exercise a peremptory strike.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “To meet the burden of proving that the striking party exercised its peremptory challenges in a discriminatory manner, the complaining party may employ a comparative analysis of minority and non-minority jurors to show disparate treatment.”
    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.