Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 894 So. 2d 88 - Busby v. State

894 So. 2d 88 - Busby v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2005

Citation profile

56
cited by 56 later decisions
5
states following
August 2024
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 50 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently August 2024 · most notably 961 So. 2d 312 - Carratelli v. State (2007), State v. Magee (2012)

1 federal appellate · 50 state decisions

330200520102020decided

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 · Irvin v. Dowd · Swain v. State of Alabama · Caldwell v. Mississippi · Doerr v. Doerr

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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The test for determining juror competency is whether the juror can lay aside any bias or prejudice and render a verdict solely on the evidence presented and the instructions on the law given by the court.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[a] defendant cannot demonstrate prejudice if the trial court grants the same number of additional peremptories as cause challenges that were erroneously denied.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “(10) The juror has a state of mind regarding the defendant, the case, the person alleged to have been injured by the offense charged, or the person on whose complaint the prosecution was instituted that will prevent the juror from acting with impartiality, but the formation of an opinion or impression regarding the guilt or innocence of the defendant shall not be a sufficient ground for challenge to a juror if he or she declares and the court determines that he or she can render an impartial verdict according to the evidence!)]”
    3 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.