Walker v. Bd Goldsmith’s Empirical Analysis
902 F.2d 16 · 1990
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Castaneda v. Partida · Tiller v. NCNB Bank · Shibuya v. Voss · Howard v. United States · United States v. Potter
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.
“Petitioner, an Arizona state prisoner, appeals the district court's summary denial of habeas relief. Walker argues that his sixth amendment right to a jury that represents a fair cross section of the community and his fourteenth amendment right to equal protection were violated because the venire pool from which his trial jury was selected did not include those whose surnames began with the letters "W," "X," "¥," and "Z". Walker also argues that the venire system employed in his case violated Ariz.Rev.Stat. §§ 21-8014 and 21-313. We affirm the district court's order because there is no evidence that surnames beginning with the letters W through Z constitute a cognizable and distinctive class within the community. Walker was tried before a jury in the Arizona Superior Court for Pima County. He was convicted of aggravated assault and leaving the seene of an accident on September 30, 1983. He was sentenced to 10 years imprisonment. On May 1, 1987, Walker petitioned the Pima County Superior Court for post-conviction relief based on the failure to include those with surnames beginning with the letters W through Z in the venire from which his trial jury had been selected. Walker contended that this group constituted a recognizable and distinct class. FN1 The Pima County Superior Court refused to recognize that those with sur names beginning with the letters W through Z constitute a cognizable class. The court denied Walker's petition. The Arizona Court of Appeals denied his petitio”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Bloomer v. State
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.