942 So. 2d 484 - State v. Snyder’s Empirical Analysis
2006
Citation profile
21 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Miller-El v. Cockrell Director Texas Department of Criminal Justice Institutional Division · Batson v. Kentucky · Swain v. State of Alabama · Hernandez v. New York
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“of the prosecutor's proffered reason for striking a potential juror”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage““MR. VASQUEZ:... His main problem yesterday was the fact that he didn’t know if he would miss some teaching time as a student teacher. The clerk called the school and whoever it was and the Dean said that wouldn’t be a problem. He was told that this would go through the weekend, and he expressed that that was his only concern, that he didn’t have any other problems. “As far as him looking nervous, hell, everybody out here looks nervous. I’m nervous. “MR. OLINDE: Judge, it’s— “MR. VASQUEZ: Judge, that’s — You know. “MR. OLINDE: —a question of this: It’s a peremptory-challenge. We need 12 out of 12 people. Mr. Brooks was very uncertain and very nervous looking and— “THE COURT: All right. I’m going [to] allow the challenge. I’m going to allow the challenge.” App. 445.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Snyder v. Louisiana“No peremptory challenge made by the state or the defendant shall be based solely upon the race of the juror. If an objection is made that the state or defense has excluded a juror solely on the basis of race, and a prima facie case supporting that objection is made by the objecting party, the court may demand a satisfactory racially neutral reason for the exercise of the challenge, unless the court is satisfied that such reason is apparent from the voir dire examination of the juror. Such demand and disclosure, if required by the court, shall be made outside of the hearing of any juror or prospective juror.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.