Wysinger v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis
886 F.2d 295 · 1989
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently July 2025
3 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 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 Duren v. Missouri · New York v. Ferber · FW/PBS, Inc. v. City of Dallas · Miller v. Haynes · Air Line Pilots Ass'n, International v. Thurston
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Tuscaloosa County citizens between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five did not constitute a distinctive or cognizable group for purposes of the Sixth Amendment”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the young [adults aged 18 to 30] are not a distinctive group for purposes of jury venire.”
1 later decision 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.