Batson V. Kentucky

288 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Adkins v. Warden, Holman CF, Comm'r, Ala. Dep't of Corr.
  710 F.3d 1241· 11th Cir.· 2013-02-27 ·cited 28×
  The Court of Criminal Appeals' decision did not adjudicate a federal constitutional claim on the merits, but rather a state law claim arising from its application of the plain error doctrine. Therefore, federal habeas relief under AEDPA is not warranted.
• Dean v. State
  703 So. 2d 1180· Fla. 3d DCA· 1997-12-24 ·cited 28×
  The trial court erred by disallowing a peremptory strike based on a facially race-neutral reason without proceeding to the third step of the Melbourne analysis to determine pretext.
• United States v. Roberts
  913 F.2d 211· 5th Cir.· 1990-09-19 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the government's use of peremptory strikes did not violate Batson, the ex parte communication with the jury case manager did not constitute reversible error, and the evidence was sufficient to support the defendants' convictions.
• United States v. Moore
  895 F.2d 484· 8th Cir.· 1990-02-05 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the trial court's finding of no prima facie case of racial discrimination in jury selection was not clearly erroneous, and thus the defendant's equal protection rights were not violated.
• Fludd v. J.B. Dykes
  863 F.2d 822· 11th Cir.· 1989-01-17 ·cited 28×
  The Batson v. Kentucky rule, which prohibits racially motivated peremptory challenges, applies in civil cases as well as criminal cases. The trial court's refusal to consider Batson in a civil suit constitutes reversible error.
• Ebony Hall v. Hosain Daee
  602 So. 2d 512· Fla.· 1992-05-14 ·cited 27×
  The Florida Supreme Court clarified the standard for conducting a Neil inquiry into potentially discriminatory use of peremptory challenges in jury selection. The court held that while there is no per se number of challenges triggering an automatic inquiry, a trial court abuses i
• United States v. Lowden David
  844 F.2d 767· 11th Cir.· 1988-05-05 ·cited 27×
  The court affirmed the district court's finding that the defendant failed to prove discriminatory use of peremptory challenges, and that the prosecutor's stated reasons were sufficient to rebut any prima facie case.
• Reather Reynolds v. City OF Little Rock
  893 F.2d 1004· 8th Cir.· 1990-01-12 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the Equal Protection Clause prohibits governmental litigants from using peremptory challenges to exclude jurors based on race in civil cases, and that the City's refusal to justify its strikes required vacating the judgment for a Batson hearing.
• United States v. Travles Russell Lane
  866 F.2d 103· 4th Cir.· 1989-01-25 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the district court did not err in finding no prima facie case of discrimination based on the prosecutor's strike of one black juror, nor in accepting the prosecutor's neutral reason for striking a black alternate juror.
• Wilson v. Butler
  813 F.2d 664· 5th Cir.· 1987-03-24 ·cited 26×
• Files v. State
  586 So. 2d 352· Fla. 1st DCA· 1991-08-30 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to strike the jury panel, and the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions.
• United States v. Johnson
  941 F.2d 1102· 10th Cir.· 1991-08-15 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the prosecution's peremptory challenges were race-neutral and the trial court's finding of no intentional discrimination was not clearly erroneous. The court also held that Oklahoma's deferred sentencing statute automatically expunges a criminal record upon su
• United States v. Thomas
  914 F.2d 139· 8th Cir.· 1990-09-11 ·cited 24×
  The court held that sufficient evidence supported the jury's finding of possession, the government's peremptory challenge was not discriminatory, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting a witness's prior conviction or in departing from the Sentencing Guid
• Thaddeus Donald Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Co., Inc.
  895 F.2d 218· 5th Cir.· 1990-03-01 ·cited 24×
• United States v. Fuller
  887 F.2d 144· 8th Cir.· 1989-10-05 ·cited 24×
  The court affirmed the defendant's convictions and sentence, finding no reversible error in the jury selection, evidence admission, closing arguments, or sentencing.
• United States v. Wilson
  816 F.2d 421· 8th Cir.· 1987-04-16 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the Batson v. Kentucky decision, which redefined the evidentiary burden for discrimination claims in jury selection, is to be retroactively applied to cases pending on direct appeal.
• United States v. Hendrieth
  922 F.2d 748· 11th Cir.· 1991-01-30 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the district court did not err in its rulings regarding jury selection, admissibility of evidence, prosecutor's closing arguments, or sentencing.
• Ladd v. Jones
  864 F.2d 108· 11th Cir.· 1989-01-23 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the appellant's claims were procedurally barred and that his counsel was not ineffective.
• Gov't of the Virgin Islands v. Forte
  865 F.2d 59· 3d Cir.· 1989-01-06 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the trial court abused its discretion by denying an evidentiary hearing on a motion to vacate conviction based on ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to object to jury selection practices.
• United States v. Tucker
  773 F.2d 136· 7th Cir.· 1985-09-06 ·cited 23×
  The court held that a letter of credit is within the scope of 18 U.S.C. § 1014, and that the evidence was sufficient to convict all defendants, with no reversible error found in the trial proceedings.
• United States v. Guerra-Marez
  928 F.2d 665· 5th Cir.· 1991-04-01 ·cited 22×
  The court held that wiretap evidence was admissible, a variance between the indictment and evidence did not prejudice substantial rights, and prosecutorial explanations for jury strikes were adequate. However, the evidence was insufficient to support Wenseslada Reyes-Moya's consp
• United States v. Grandison
  885 F.2d 143· 4th Cir.· 1989-09-12 ·cited 22×
  The court should have required the prosecution to provide a racially neutral explanation for its peremptory strikes.
• Hill v. State
  547 So. 2d 175· Fla. 4th DCA· 1989-06-07 ·cited 22×
  The Florida appellate court reversed a conviction because the trial court erred in allowing the state to use a peremptory challenge to remove a black juror based on the unsupported claim that she appeared bored during voir dire. The court held that when a defendant establishes a
• United States v. Ingram
  839 F.2d 1327· 8th Cir.· 1988-02-19 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the defendant's motion to suppress post-arrest statements, nor in denying his motion for a mistrial based on the prosecution's use of peremptory challenges.
• United States v. Martinez-Nava
  838 F.2d 411· 10th Cir.· 1988-01-27 ·cited 22×
  The court held that defendants' convictions were valid, rejecting all their appellate contentions regarding jury selection, supplemental jury instructions, admission of testimony, and prosecutorial misconduct.
• High v. Kemp
  819 F.2d 988· 11th Cir.· 1987-06-04 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the jury instructions regarding mitigating circumstances were adequate and that the prosecutor's comments about other murders did not render the trial fundamentally unfair. The court also found that Batson v. Kentucky does not apply retroactively to collateral
• Garrett v. Morris
  815 F.2d 509· 8th Cir.· 1987-04-03 ·cited 22×
  The court held that when a prosecutor volunteers reasons for exercising peremptory challenges, those reasons are subject to review for pretext, and if found to be discriminatory, violate the defendant's constitutional rights.
• Gov't of the Virgin Islands v. Forte
  806 F.2d 73· 3d Cir.· 1986-11-26 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the defendant waived his objection to the prosecutor's peremptory challenges by failing to raise it contemporaneously, and that the alleged error did not constitute plain error. The court also held that claims of ineffective assistance of counsel must be raise
• United States v. Mitchell
  877 F.2d 294· 4th Cir.· 1989-06-08 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the use of a close relationship with a congressman to influence a congressional investigation, even without illegal means, constitutes a corrupt endeavor under 18 U.S.C. § 1505, and that wire fraud convictions are valid when based on a scheme to defraud a comp
• Poole v. United States
  832 F.2d 561· 11th Cir.· 1987-11-19 ·cited 21×
  The court held that defense counsel can stipulate to the federally insured status of banks without the defendant's explicit consent, and that the defendant was adequately represented at sentencing despite a procedural timing issue.
• Wilkerson v. Collins
  950 F.2d 1054· 5th Cir.· 1992-01-06 ·cited 20×
• United States v. Hamilton
  850 F.2d 1038· 4th Cir.· 1988-06-29 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the prosecution's striking of black women jurors, while not striking white women, constituted purposeful racial and sexual discrimination.
• United States v. Sgro
  816 F.2d 30· 1st Cir.· 1987-04-17 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the defendant failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination under Batson v. Kentucky because he did not prove that Italian-Americans constitute a constitutionally cognizable group. The court also held that alleged prosecutorial misconduct did not de
• United States v. Woods
  812 F.2d 1483· 4th Cir.· 1987-03-05 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed the mail fraud convictions, finding no reversible error in the jury selection process under Batson v. Kentucky, the refusal to define reasonable doubt, or the claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.
• Randall v. State
  718 So. 2d 230· Fla. 3d DCA· 1998-08-19 ·cited 19×
  Maurice Antonio Randall, an African-American defendant, was convicted of burglary after a jury trial. The appellate court reversed his conviction, finding that the State impermissibly used a race-based peremptory challenge to strike an African-American juror while accepting a whi
• United States v. Rodriguez
  917 F.2d 1286· 11th Cir.· 1990-11-08 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the defendants' Batson objection was untimely and that the exclusion of evidence regarding alleged entrapment and lost tapes did not violate their rights.
• United States v. Encarnacion Moreno
  878 F.2d 817· 5th Cir.· 1989-07-14 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in rejecting the Batson challenge, that evidence was sufficient to convict Moreno for importing cocaine, but insufficient to convict Orguiza for conspiracy, and that the trial court erred by failing to make an on-the-record finding
• United States v. Clark Porter
  831 F.2d 760· 8th Cir.· 1987-10-07 ·cited 19×
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentences of both defendants, finding no reversible error in evidentiary rulings, identification procedures, sufficiency of evidence, sentence enhancement, juvenile transfer, jury selection, or jury instructions.
• Son H. Fleming v. Kemp
  794 F.2d 1478· 11th Cir.· 1986-06-27 ·cited 19×
  The concurring judge believes the issue of waiver of the right to counsel has sufficient merit to warrant a stay of execution for briefing and review.
• United States v. Williams
  934 F.2d 847· 7th Cir.· 1991-06-04 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court's finding of no purposeful discrimination in jury selection was not clearly erroneous, and the defendant failed to establish ineffective assistance of counsel under the Strickland test.
• United States v. Johnson
  873 F.2d 1137· 8th Cir.· 1989-05-02 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court erred in failing to require the government to articulate its reasons for striking black potential jurors, thus remanding for a Batson hearing.
• Elisha Thomas, Jr. v. Moore
  866 F.2d 803· 5th Cir.· 1989-03-02 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the Batson rule, which addresses racially discriminatory use of peremptory challenges, is not applicable when no timely objection to jury selection was made.
• United States v. Tindle
  860 F.2d 125· 4th Cir.· 1988-10-25 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying the defendant access to the prosecutor's annotated jury list and that the government failed to provide a non-pretextual, neutral explanation for striking two black jurors.
• Edwards v. Scroggy
  849 F.2d 204· 5th Cir.· 1988-07-15 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the erroneous admission of a misdemeanor conviction was not prejudicial and did not require vacating the sentence, distinguishing the case from Johnson v. Mississippi.
• In re Maloney v. Plunkett
  854 F.2d 152· 7th Cir.· 1988-07-14 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a writ of mandamus was appropriate to vacate a district judge's order discharging a jury and forbidding peremptory challenges, due to the exceptional burdens and infringement of statutory rights.
• United States v. Cloyd
  819 F.2d 836· 8th Cir.· 1987-05-22 ·cited 18×
  The court affirmed the conviction and sentences for armed bank robbery and firearm use, but referred the issue of enhanced sentencing for firearm possession to an en banc panel.
• Teague v. Lane
  820 F.2d 832· 7th Cir.· 1987-05-11 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the Sixth Amendment's fair cross-section requirement applies to the jury pool, not the petit jury itself, and therefore the prosecution's use of peremptory challenges to exclude Black jurors did not violate the defendant's Sixth Amendment rights.
• Blackshear v. State
  504 So. 2d 1330· Fla. 1st DCA· 1987-03-20 ·cited 18×
  The defendant failed to meet the initial burden of demonstrating a strong likelihood that the state's peremptory challenges were exercised solely because of race.
• United States v. Tucker
  836 F.2d 334· 7th Cir.· 1988-01-06 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a new trial based on newly discovered evidence and that the in camera, ex parte procedure for addressing Batson challenges was constitutional.
• United States v. Ferguson
  935 F.2d 862· 7th Cir.· 1991-06-19 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the prosecutor's use of peremptory strikes based on youth and unemployment was not a Batson violation, and the defendant failed to prove his prior guilty pleas were unconstitutional for sentence enhancement purposes.