State v. Pullen’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
30 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2015 · most notably State v. Smulls (1996), State v. Hall (1997)
30 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
Relies on Batson v. Kentucky · Swain v. State of Alabama · Hernandez v. New York · Powers v. Ohio · Georgia v. McCollum
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 determining whether peremptory challenges have been exercised in a racially discriminatory manner, the prosecutor’s explanation is deemed to be race-neutral unless a discriminatory intent is inherent in the explanation. State v. Parker, 836 S.W.2d 930, 934 (Mo. banc 1992). If the prosecutor articulates an acceptable reason for the strike, the defendant is required then to show that the state’s proffered reasons for the strikes were merely pretextual and that the strikes were racially motivated. Id. The chief consideration is the plausibility of the prosecutor’s explanations in view of the totality of the facts and circumstances surrounding the case. Id. The trial court’s determination regarding purposeful discrimination is a finding of fact that will not be overturned on appeal unless clearly erroneous. State v. Hernandez, — U.S. -, -, 111 S.Ct. 1859, 1872 , 114 L.Ed.2d 395 (1991); Parker, 836 S.W.2d at 939 n. 7.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Crenshaw
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.