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.
28 Mississippi opinions name it 2 courts 1995–2023 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Mississippi 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 |
|---|---|---|
Stewart v. Stategreen2 sentences2009In Stewart , [the Mississippi Supreme Court] held that “one of the reasons the trial cowt is granted such deference in a Batson issue is because the demeanor-of the attorney making the challenge is often the best evidence on the issue of race neutrality.” [Stewart,] 662 So.2d at 559 . 2009As mentioned above, “the demeanor of the attorney making the challenge is often the best evidence on the issue of race neutrality.” Stewart, 662 So.2d at 559 . | 4 | 14 |
Walker v. Stategreen2 sentences2016In Walker v. State, 815 So. 2d 1209, 1215 (¶12) (Miss. 2002), the supreme court stated that “determination of discriminatory intent will likely turn on a trial judge's evaluation of a presenter's credibility and whether an explanation should be believed.” The Walker court explained that “[o]ne of the reasons the trial court is afforded such deference when a Batson challenge is raised is because the 13 Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986). 33 demeanor of the attorney making the challenge is often the best evidence on the issue of [gender] neutrality.” Id. 2016In Walker v. State, 815 So.2d 1209, 1215 (¶ 12) (Miss.2002), the supreme court stated that “determination of discriminatory intent will likely turn on a trial judge’s evaluation of a presenter’s credibility and whether an explanation should be believed.” The Walker court explained that “[o]ne of .the reasons the trial court is afforded such deference when a Batson challenge is raised is because the demeanor of the attorney making the challenge is often the best evidence on the issue of [gender] neutrality.” Id. | 4 | 4 |
Webster v. Stategreen2 sentences2023One reason the trial court is afforded such deference in a Batson challenge “is because the demeanor of the attorney making the challenge is often the best evidence on the issue of race neutrality.” Id. (citing Webster, 754 So. 2d at 1236 (¶10)). ¶33. 2008"One of the reasons the trial court is afforded such deference when a Batson challenge is raised is because the demeanor of the attorney making the challenge is often the best evidence on the issue of race neutrality." Id. (citing Webster v. State, 754 So.2d 1232, 1236 (¶ 10) (Miss.2000)). | 2 | 4 |
Lynch v. Stategreen2 sentences2012“This is true because ‘the demeanor of the attorney making the challenge is often the best evidence on the issue of race neutrality.’ ” Lynch, 877 So.2d at 1271 . 2007See Lynch, 877 So.2d at 1271 ("the demeanor of the attorney making the challenge is often the best evidence on the issue of race neutrality") (quoting Walker v. State, 815 So.2d 1209, 1215 (Miss.2002)). | 2 | 3 |
Hernandez v. New Yorkgreen2 sentences2002Stewart v. State, 662 So.2d 552, 559 (Miss.1995) (citing, Hernandez v. New York, 500 U.S. 352, 365 , 111 S.Ct. 1859 , 114 L.Ed.2d 395 (1991)). 2002Stewart v. State, 662 So.2d 552, 559 (Miss.1995) (citing, Hernandez v. New York, 500 U.S. 352, 365 , 111 S.Ct. 1859 , 114 L.Ed.2d 395 (1991)). | 1 | 6 |
Davis v. Stategreen1 sentence1996Batson, 476 U.S. at 94 ; Davis, 660 So. 2d at 1264 (Banks, J., concurring); Hatten, 628 So. 2d at 303 (Hawkins, C.J., specially concurring); Mack, 650 So. 2d at 1298 . 6. | 1 | 1 |
Walker v. Stategreen1 sentence1996Hernandez, 500 U.S. at 365; Lockett, 517 So. 2d at 1352 ; Mack, 650 So. 2d at 1299 ; Stewart, 662 So. 2d at 559 ("[D]emeanor of the attorney making the challenge is often the best evidence on the issue of race neutrality.")(citations omitted); Walker v. State, 671 So. 2d 581, 628 (Miss. 1995), cert. denied, 117 S.Ct. 518 (1996). 5. | 1 | 1 |
Hatten v. Stategreen1 sentence1996Batson, 476 U.S. at 94 ; Davis, 660 So. 2d at 1264 (Banks, J., concurring); Hatten, 628 So. 2d at 303 (Hawkins, C.J., specially concurring); Mack, 650 So. 2d at 1298 . 6. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Mississippi. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Batson v. Kentucky
green
2 sentences2023One reason the trial court is afforded such deference in a Batson challenge “is because the demeanor of the attorney making the challenge is often the best evidence on the issue of race neutrality.” Id. (citing Webster, 754 So. 2d at 1236 (¶10)). ¶33. 2016In Walker v. State, 815 So. 2d 1209, 1215 (¶12) (Miss. 2002), the supreme court stated that “determination of discriminatory intent will likely turn on a trial judge's evaluation of a presenter's credibility and whether an explanation should be believed.” The Walker court explained that “[o]ne of the reasons the trial court is afforded such deference when a Batson challenge is raised is because the 13 Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986). 33 demeanor of the attorney making the challenge is often the best evidence on the issue of [gender] neutrality.” Id. | 3 | 1996–2023 |
Berry v. State
green
1 sentence2008"One of the reasons the trial court is afforded such deference when a Batson challenge is raised is because the demeanor of the attorney making the challenge is often the best evidence on the issue of race neutrality." Id. (citing Webster v. State, 754 So.2d 1232, 1236 (¶ 10) (Miss.2000)). | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Lockett v. State
green
1 sentence1996Hernandez, 500 U.S. at 365; Lockett, 517 So. 2d at 1352 ; Mack, 650 So. 2d at 1299 ; Stewart, 662 So. 2d at 559 ("[D]emeanor of the attorney making the challenge is often the best evidence on the issue of race neutrality.")(citations omitted); Walker v. State, 671 So. 2d 581, 628 (Miss. 1995), cert. denied, 117 S.Ct. 518 (1996). 5. | 1 | 1996–1996 |
MacK v. State
green
2 sentences1996Hernandez, 500 U.S. at 365; Lockett, 517 So. 2d at 1352 ; Mack, 650 So. 2d at 1299 ; Stewart, 662 So. 2d at 559 ("[D]emeanor of the attorney making the challenge is often the best evidence on the issue of race neutrality.")(citations omitted); Walker v. State, 671 So. 2d 581, 628 (Miss. 1995), cert. denied, 117 S.Ct. 518 (1996). 5. 1996Batson, 476 U.S. at 94 ; Davis, 660 So. 2d at 1264 (Banks, J., concurring); Hatten, 628 So. 2d at 303 (Hawkins, C.J., specially concurring); Mack, 650 So. 2d at 1298 . 6. | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Habiger v. City of Fargo
green
1 sentence1996Hernandez, 500 U.S. at 365; Lockett, 517 So. 2d at 1352 ; Mack, 650 So. 2d at 1299 ; Stewart, 662 So. 2d at 559 ("[D]emeanor of the attorney making the challenge is often the best evidence on the issue of race neutrality.")(citations omitted); Walker v. State, 671 So. 2d 581, 628 (Miss. 1995), cert. denied, 117 S.Ct. 518 (1996). 5. | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.