Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 743 SW2D 260 - Dewberry v. State

Dewberry v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1987

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
2
states following
June 2000
most recently cited

5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently June 2000

5 state decisions

30198719902000decided

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.

Appellate journey

reviewedthe decision below (from Texas 203rd Judicial District Court)

Relationships

Relies on Batson v. Kentucky · Griffith v. Kentucky · Ake v. Oklahoma · Strunk v. United States · Royster v. State

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.

  1. ““[T]hat appellant is black, the victim of the offense was white, and both of the State’s primary witnesses were white. Appellant and the State were each allotted ten peremptory strikes following the voir dire of the jury panel. The State peremptorily struck five of the six potential black venirepersons and used its remaining five strikes on whites. Appellant peremptorily struck ten white venirepersons. The jury consisted of eleven white jurors and one black juror.” Dewberry, 743 S.W.2d at 265 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “1. Defendant is a member of the black race, a cognizable racial group. 2. The State exercised peremptory challenges to remove from the venire panel some members of the Defendant’s racial group. 3. No facts or other relevant circumstances raised an inference that the State used peremptory challenges to exclude, from the panel, members of Defendant’s racial group solely on account of their race, or on account of the Defendant’s race...." (emphasis in original).”
    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.