Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 829 P2D 468 - People v. Cerrone

People v. Cerrone’s Empirical Analysis

1992

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
June 1995
most recently cited

3 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Batson v. Kentucky · Powers v. Ohio · Castaneda v. Partida · Vasquez v. Hillery · Bank of Nova Scotia 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “deems it to be in the public interest to convene a grand jury which has jurisdiction extending beyond the boundaries of any single county.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[to] prepare a list of prospective state grand jurors drawn from existing jury lists of the several counties. In preparing the list of prospective state jurors, the state court administrator need not include names of jurors from every county within the state, but he may select jurors from counties near the county in which the chief judge requesting the list presides. The chief judge ... shall empanel the state grand jury from the list compiled by the state court administrator. A state grand jury shall be composed of twelve or [upon motion of the district attorney and for good cause shown] twenty-three members ..., but not more than one-fourth of the members of the state grand jury shall be residents of any one county. The members of the state grand jury shall be selected by the chief judge with the advice of the attorney general and shall serve for one year following selection unless discharged sooner by the chief judge.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Once the defendant makes the requisite [prima facie] showing, [in the second step of Batson ] the burden shifts to the prosecution to explain adequately the racial exclusion. The prosecution must demonstrate that permissible racially neutral selection criteria and procedures have produced the result.”
    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.