Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 829 SW2D 164 - Linscomb v. State

Linscomb v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1992

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
2
states following
October 2013
most recently cited

25 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently October 2013 · most notably Yarborough v. State (1997), Watkins v. State (2008)

25 state decisions

190199220002010decided

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 Texas Department of Community Affairs v. Burdine · Batson v. Kentucky · Swain v. State of Alabama · Powers v. Ohio · Holland v. Illinois

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

  1. “[T]he bare fact of strikes exercised against persons of a certain race does not necessarily reveal the work of a racially prejudiced mind. What may be revealing, however, is a repetition of such strikes in suspiciously large numbers — numbers larger than one would expect if race had nothing to do with it. Establishing a prima facie case in this way, based only on the relative number of peremptory challenges against members of an identifiable race, is not impossible. Judges at all levels must frankly assess the legitimate inferences to be drawn from statistical evidence made available to them before making up their minds. Sometimes such evidence will be telling.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “A prima facie case is what raises the issue, not what eventually disposes of it. In determining, therefore, whether a prima facie case is reflected on the record, courts are not to resolve the question of deliberate racial discrimination on its merits.... They are simply to decide whether the issue has been raised.”
    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.