Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Indiana opinions name it 2 courts 2000–2013 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Indiana courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Merritt v. EVANSVILLE-VANDERBURGH SCHOOL CORP.green2 sentences2012Corp., 735 N.E.2d 269, 272 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000) (Sharpnack, C.J., dissenting), trans. granted). 2002Dissenting in the present case, Chief Judge Sharpnack explained the rationale for this approach: "[Where a trial court may have erred in denying a party's challenge for cause, and the party can cure such error by peremptorily removing the apparently biased venireperson, the party should do so in order to ensure a fair trial and an efficient resolution of the case." Merritt, 735 N.E.2d at 272 (Sharpnack, C.J., dissenting) (citation omitted). 4 Peremptory strikes "permit litigants to assist the government in the selection of an impartial trier of fact." Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Co., 500 U. | 2 | 2 |
Foresta v. Stategreen2 sentences2000See Foresta, 274 Ind. at 660 , 413 N.E.2d at 890 (noting that “the record reveals that defense counsel failed to exhaust his peremptory challenges, and thus could have had this juror removed automatically through this Procedure”). 2000See Foresta, 274 Ind. at 660 , 413 N.E.2d at 890 (noting that “the record reveals that defense counsel failed to exhaust his peremptory challenges, and thus could have had this juror removed automatically through this Procedure”). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Merritt v. Evansville-Vanderburgh School Corp.
green
2 sentences2012Our Supreme Court explained that the rationale for the exhaustion rule is as follows: “‘[W]here a trial court may have erred in denying a party’s challenge for cause, and the party can cure such error by peremptorily removing the 14 apparently biased venireperson, the party should do so in order to ensure a fair trial and an efficient resolution of the case.’” Id. (quoting Merritt v. Evansville-Vanderburgh Sch. 2011The rationale for this approach is that “where a trial court may have erred in denying a party’s challenge for cause, and the party can cure such error by peremptorily removing the apparently biased venire person, the party should do so in order to ensure a fair trial and an efficient resolution of the case.” Id. | 2 | 2011–2012 |
Robinson v. State
green
1 sentence2013The rationale for this approach is that “where a trial court may have erred in denying a party’s challenge for cause, and the party can cure such error by peremptorily removing the apparently biased venire person, the party should do so in order to ensure a fair trial and an efficient resolution of the case.” Id. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Ross v. Oklahoma
green
2 sentences2002In Ross v. Oklahoma, 487 U.S. 81 , 108 S.Ct. 2278 , 101 L.Ed.2d 80 (1988), the U.S. Supreme Court upheld Oklahoma's exhaustion requirement against a federal constitutional challenge, describing peremptory strikes as "a means to achieve the end of an impartial jury" rather than a right of constitutional dimension. 2002In Ross v. Oklahoma, 487 U.S. 81 , 108 S.Ct. 2278 , 101 L.Ed.2d 80 (1988), the U.S. Supreme Court upheld Oklahoma's exhaustion requirement against a federal constitutional challenge, describing peremptory strikes as "a means to achieve the end of an impartial jury" rather than a right of constitutional dimension. | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Co.
green
2 sentences2002Dissenting in the present case, Chief Judge Sharpnack explained the rationale for this approach: "[Where a trial court may have erred in denying a party's challenge for cause, and the party can cure such error by peremptorily removing the apparently biased venireperson, the party should do so in order to ensure a fair trial and an efficient resolution of the case." Merritt, 735 N.E.2d at 272 (Sharpnack, C.J., dissenting) (citation omitted). 4 Peremptory strikes "permit litigants to assist the government in the selection of an impartial trier of fact." Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Co., 500 U. 2002Dissenting in the present case, Chief Judge Sharpnack explained the rationale for this approach: "[Where a trial court may have erred in denying a party's challenge for cause, and the party can cure such error by peremptorily removing the apparently biased venireperson, the party should do so in order to ensure a fair trial and an efficient resolution of the case." Merritt, 735 N.E.2d at 272 (Sharpnack, C.J., dissenting) (citation omitted). 4 Peremptory strikes "permit litigants to assist the government in the selection of an impartial trier of fact." Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Co., 500 U. | 1 | 2002–2002 |