Search for: "Batson v. Kentucky"
Results 221 - 240
of 341
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Jun 2010, 1:30 pm
"Nearly 25 years after Batson v. [read post]
14 May 2007, 8:03 am
Vassar, 06-1111) ** An appeal seeking an interpretation of the 1986 ruling in Batson v. [read post]
26 Dec 2010, 7:10 pm
Remand ordered for a Batson hearing. [read post]
8 Jun 2023, 2:21 pm
Mississippi, 22-6057Issues: (1) Whether Mississippi continues in the present case to erroneously misapply Batson v. [read post]
3 Sep 2021, 4:28 pm
Kentucky when the evidence was not available to the petitioner during state court Batson proceedings. [read post]
22 May 2008, 7:32 am
In jury selection, the defendant challenged the state's use of its peremptory challenges as being motivated by race under Batson v. [read post]
21 Nov 2008, 4:57 pm
California Equal Protection Jury Selection — Batson Challenges: Snyder v. [read post]
11 Feb 2019, 11:07 am
Kentucky has worked in regulating race-based peremptory challenges. [read post]
18 May 2016, 5:19 pm
Kentucky step; (2) whether the Arizona Supreme Court, where it has continuously refused Simmons v. [read post]
27 Jan 2014, 9:50 am
Kentucky applied to peremptory strikes based on sexual orientation. [read post]
2 Nov 2017, 8:28 am
Kentucky and J.E.B. v. [read post]
29 Oct 2012, 5:10 pm
Indeed, in the seminal case of Batson v. [read post]
20 Feb 2019, 4:16 am
Mississippi, which asks whether a prosecutor’s repeated use of peremptory challenges to remove black people from the jury pool violated the Constitution, the justices could “put some teeth into Batson v. [read post]
27 Aug 2015, 9:01 pm
Various Supreme Court Justices (including Thurgood Marshall in Batson itself and Stephen Breyer a decade ago in Miller-El v. [read post]
20 Mar 2019, 12:37 pm
Supreme Court’s 1986 decision in Batson v. [read post]
22 Apr 2024, 5:00 am
Inst. v. [read post]
20 Mar 2008, 7:36 am
Kentucky - which eliminated the practice of racial discrimination in jury selection. [read post]
17 Jan 2007, 9:58 am
Carneal v. [read post]
23 Feb 2010, 6:50 pm
No prior ruling of the Court, the Justices said in an unsigned, apparently unanimous opinion, requires that the judge have been on hand during jury selection in order to evaluate a claimed violation of Batson v. [read post]
