Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 800 So. 2d 472 - Snow v. State

800 So. 2d 472 - Snow v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2001

Citation profile

54
cited by 54 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
3
states following
September 2018
most recently cited

49 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 54 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2018 · most notably 863 So. 2d 836 - Byrom v. State (2003), 805 So. 2d 452 - Simmons v. State (2001)

49 state decisions

43020012010decided

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 Strickland v. Washington · Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Batson v. Kentucky · Gregg v. Georgia · Rhode Island v. Innis

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

  1. “(1) that he is a member of cognizable racial group; (2) that the prosecutor has exercised peremptory challenges to remove from the venire members of the defendant's race; (3) and the facts and circumstances raised an inference that the prosecutor used his peremptory challenges for the purpose of striking minorities.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
    e.g. 947 So. 2d 910 - Flowers v. State · 817 So. 2d 644 - Collins v. State
  2. “Hatten does not require literal truth in the reason proffered. It only requires that there be some basis in fact sufficient to allow the court to make a reasonable judgment that it is not contrived.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
    e.g. Pruitt v. State · Booker v. State
  3. “[w]e decline to set any limits on the prosecutor's use of any legitimate informational source heretofore or hereafter available as to jurors”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
    e.g. Pruitt v. State · 947 So. 2d 910 - Flowers v. State

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.