United States v. Ingram’s Empirical Analysis
839 F.2d 1327 · 1988
Citation profile
31
cited by 31 later decisions
4
states following
November 1997
most recently cited
25 federal appellate · 5 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Batson v. Kentucky · North Carolina v. Butler · Sloan v. Hicks · McSurely v. McClellan · United States v. Montgomery
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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In this case, the defendant, in support of his argument that a prima facie case of discrimination has been established, relies solely on the fact that the prosecution struck one of two potential black jurors. The Eighth Circuit has said that “bare reliance on the fact that the government used one of its peremptory challenges to exclude one of two black veniremen falls short of raising an inference of purposeful discrimination necessary to establish a prima facie case under Batson.” [United States v.] Porter, 831 F.2d [760,] 767-68 [ (8th Cir.1987) ]. See United States v. Montgomery, 819 F.2d 847, 851 (8th Cir.1987). We conclude that the facts and circumstances of this case likewise do not raise the necessary inference of discrimination and that the district court was correct in overruling the motion for a mistrial without further inquiry of the prosecutor.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Elem
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.