United States v. Lane’s Empirical Analysis
866 F.2d 103 · 1989
Citation profile
53 federal appellate · 22 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 102 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2025 · most notably Snyder v. Louisiana (2008), United States v. Bishop (1992)
53 federal appellate · 22 state decisions — followed in 12 states
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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 661
Relies on Batson v. Kentucky · Swain v. State of Alabama · Castaneda v. Partida · Alexander v. Louisiana · Avery v. State of Georgia
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 102 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“As Lane correctly points out, striking only one black prospective juror for a discriminatory reason violates a black defendant's equal protection rights, even when other black jurors are seated and even when valid reasons are articulated for challenges to other black prospective jurors.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“weighs heavily in support of the district court finding of no discrimination.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Id. The government, however, did not object to the district court's determination that a prima facie case had been established, rendering its challenge on appeal reviewable only for plain error, of which there is no showing. Moreover, the government provided a race-neutral justification for its strike, and we have held that”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.