Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 815 So. 2d 1209 - Walker v. State

815 So. 2d 1209 - Walker v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2002

Citation profile

44
cited by 44 later decisions
2
states following
November 2017
most recently cited

40 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently November 2017 · most notably 921 So. 2d 292 - Spicer v. State (2006), Brown v. State (2004)

40 state decisions

29020022010decided

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 · 517 So. 2d 1346 - Lockett v. State · Stringer v. State · 662 So. 2d 552 - Stewart v. State · 703 So. 2d 269 - Berry 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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The race neutral explanations must be viewed in the light most favorable to the trial court's findings.”
    8 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “area, body language, demeanor, prosecutor's distrust of the juror, inconsistency between oral responses and juror's card, criminal history of juror or relative, social work and other types of employment, and religious beliefs.'”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “We give great deference to the trial court's findings of whether or not a peremptory challenge was race-neutral.... Such deference is necessary because finding that a striking party engaged in discrimination is largely a factual finding and thus should be accorded appropriate deference on appeal.... Indeed, we will not overrule a trial court on a Batson ruling unless the record indicates that the ruling was clearly erroneous or against the overwhelming weight of the evidence....”
    3 later decisions 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.