United States v. Ricks’s Empirical Analysis
802 F.2d 731 · 1986
Citation profile
63 federal appellate · 2 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 90 later decisions — most recently April 2010 · most notably 53 Cal. 3d 152 - People v. Morris (1991), 52 Cal. 3d 367 - People v. Wright (1990)
63 federal appellate · 2 district · 7 state decisions
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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 848 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 848 (§ 408 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1861 (Jury Selection and Service Act of 1968)
Relies on Batson v. Kentucky · Swain v. State of Alabama · Taylor v. Louisiana · Daniel v. Security Pacific National Bank · Lewis v. United States
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 90 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he denial or impairment of the [peremptory] right is reversible error without a showing of prejudice.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“... it is essential to the validity of a jury chosen by the “struck jury” system that the list given to counsel contain only the approximate number of necessary potential jurors, or, if a larger list is given, that the court give clear, unambiguous instructions about the portion of the list, containing not more than the approximate number of necessary potential jurors, from which the jury will be selected.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“absent a local rule of court or established local practice about how a jury will be selected and how peremptory strikes should be exercised ..., there is a duty on the part of the court to give clear, unambiguous instructions to counsel about the procedure to be followed____”
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.