State v. Pharris’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently November 2010
12 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 Chapman v. State of California · Batson v. Kentucky · Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp. · Swain v. State of Alabama · Kolender v. Lawson
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'undertake "a sensitive inquiry into such cireum-stantial and direct evidence of intent as may be available.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“the prospective juror was (1) not shown to share an alleged bias, (2) not examined or subjected only to perfunctory examination by the prosecutor when neither the trial court nor the defense had questioned him or her, (3) singled out for questioning to evoke a specific response, (4) challenged for a reason unrelated to the trial, or (5) challenged for reasons equally applicable to other jurors not similarly challenged.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. State v. Merrill“determine if the exercise of the peremptory challenge violated defendant's right to equal protection under Bat-son "). "If, on remand, the trial court determines that racial discrimination motivated ... the prosecutor's peremptory challengel ], it must reverse [the] defendant's conviction and retry his case.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.