State v. Lopez’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 state decisions

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

1. ““ ‘Under the Batson rule, when confronted with an objection to a challenge of a prospective juror made on. the [issue] of race, the trial justice must first determine whether there is a prima facie showing that the challenge was motivated by race.’ State v. Price, 706 A.2d 929, 935 (R.I.1998). ‘Upon such a showing, the burden shifts to the prosecution to articulate its race-neutral reason(s) for challenging that particular juror.’ Id. ‘The trial [justice] is then left to determine whether the defendant has carried his or her burden of proving purposeful racial discrimination.’ Id. ‘[T]he decisive question will be whether counsel’s race-neutral explanation for a peremptory challenge should be believed. There will seldom be much evidence bearing on that issue, and the best evidence often will be the demeanor of the attorney who exercises the challenge.’ State v. Holley, 604 A.2d 772, 778 (R.I.1992) (quoting Hernandez v. New York, 500 U.S. 352, 365 , 111 S.Ct. 1859, 1869 , 114 L.Ed.2d 395, 409 (1991)). ‘[T]he trial justice’s evaluation of the prosecutor’s state of mind is accorded great deference.’ Id.” State v. Lopez, 721 A.2d 837, 838-39 (R.I.1998) (per curiam).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Price

2. ““After hearing the prosecutor’s rationale, the trial justice overruled the defendant’s objection, apparently viewing the prosecutor’s reason as race-neutral. Therefore, since the trial justice accepted both the prosecutor’s explanation as satisfying the race-neutral reason for the peremptory challenge and implicitly concluded that the prosecutor did not discriminate on the basis of race or ethnicity, we cannot say that the trial justice was clearly wrong in overruling defendant’s Batson objection.” Id. at 839 (emphases added).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Pona.