People v. Cerrone’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently April 2020
6 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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1962 (§ 901 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act)
Relies on Batson v. Kentucky · Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Co. · Bank of Nova Scotia v. United States · Castor v. United States · United States v. Mechanik
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[w]hen the attorney general deems it to be in the public interest to convene a grand jury which has jurisdiction extending beyond the boundaries of any single county_” § 13-73-101, 6A C.R.S. (1987). The attorney general then”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The question of economic status is a bothersome one_ [T]he problem of economic status and what economic status means under our statute has never been clearly articulated. By making a deliberate attempt to get certain kinds of people on the jury, the result was that persons of lower income may not have been included. However, the Court is going to find that as it relates to economic status that ... there was no deliberate effort to exclude persons on the basis of their economic status and in fact from the information that was available on the jury questionnaire forms it is not readily apparent what the economic status was. While the statistician extrapolated economic status from the amount of education, that those particular extrapolations or facts were certainly not necessarily known to the persons who made the recommendations or to the Judge who made the selection at the time that the selections were made.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Cerrone v. People“It is the policy of this state that all persons selected for jury service shall be selected at random from a fair cross section of the population of the area served by the court, and that all qualified citizens shall have the opportunity in accordance with the provisions of this article to be considered for jury service in this state and an obligation to serve as jurors when summoned for that purpose.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Cerrone v. People
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.