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.
25 Alabama opinions name it 2 courts 1997–2018 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Alabama 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 |
|---|---|---|
Ex Parte Watkinsgreen2 sentences2013“To find plain error in the context of a Batson or J.E.B. violation, the record must supply an inference that the prosecutor was ‘engaged in the practice of purposeful discrimination.’ ” Blackmon v. State, 7 So.3d 397, 425 (Ala.Crim.App.2005) (quoting Ex parte Watkins, 509 So.2d 1074, 1076 (Ala.1987)). 2010Additionally, the court may consider whether the State used all or most of its strikes against members of one gender.” 698 So.2d at 167-68. “ ‘To find plain error in the context of a Batson or J.E.B. violation, the record must supply an inference that the prosecutor was ‘engaged in the practice of purposeful discrimination.’ Ex parte Watkins, 509 So.2d 1074, 1076 (Ala.1987).” Blackmon v. State, 7 So.3d 397, 425 (Ala.Crim.App.2005) (opinion on application for rehearing). | 7 | 11 |
Blackmon v. Stategreen2 sentences2018Even if, however, the Batson or J.E.B. issues raised by Gaston are subject to plain-error review, Gaston is not entitled to any relief. " 'To find plain error in the context of a Batson or J.E.B. violation, the record must supply an inference that the prosecutor was "engaged in the practice of purposeful discrimination." ' Blackmon v. State , 7 So.3d 397 , 425 (Ala. Crim. 2018Even if, however, the Batson or J.E.B. issues raised by Gaston are subject to plain-error review, Gaston is not entitled to any relief. " 'To find plain error in the context of a Batson or J.E.B. violation, the record must supply an inference that the prosecutor was "engaged in the practice of purposeful discrimination." ' Blackmon v. State , 7 So.3d 397 , 425 (Ala. Crim. | 3 | 7 |
Saunders v. Stategreen2 sentences2013See also Saunders v. State, 10 So.3d 53, 78 (Ala.Crim.App. 2007) (“For an appellate court to find plain error in the Batson [or J.E.B.] context, the court must find that the record raises an inference of purposeful discrimination by the State in the exercise of peremptory challenges.”). 2010See also Saunders v. State, 10 So.3d 53, 78 (Ala.Crim.App.2007) (“For an appellate court to find plain error in the Batson [or J.E.B.] context, the court must find that the record raises an inference of purposeful discrimination by the State in the exercise of peremptory challenges.”). | 2 | 2 |
Ex Parte Trawickgreen2 sentences2015In Ex parte Trawick, 698 So.2d 162 (Ala.1997), the Alabama Supreme Court stated: “A party making a Batson or J.E.B. challenge bears the burden of proving a prima- facie case of discrimination and, in the absence of such proof, the prosecution is not required to state its reasons for its peremptory challenges. 2010As the Alabama Supreme Court stated in Ex parte Trawick, 698 So.2d 162 (Ala.1997): “A party making a Batson or J.E.B. challenge bears the burden of proving a prima facie case of discrimination and, in the absence of such proof, the prosecution is not required to state its reasons for its peremptory challenges. | 1 | 9 |
Batson v. Kentuckygreen2 sentences2018As explained by the United States Supreme Court in Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322 , 123 S.Ct. 1029 , 154 L.Ed. 2d 931 (2003) : " 'First, a defendant must make a prima facie showing that a peremptory challenge has been exercised on the basis of race [or gender]. [ Batson v. Kentucky ,] 476 U.S. [79,] 96-97[, 106 S.Ct. 1712 , 1723 (1986) ]. 2018As explained by the United States Supreme Court in Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322 , 123 S.Ct. 1029 , 154 L.Ed. 2d 931 (2003) : " 'First, a defendant must make a prima facie showing that a peremptory challenge has been exercised on the basis of race [or gender]. [ Batson v. Kentucky ,] 476 U.S. [79,] 96-97[, 106 S.Ct. 1712 , 1723 (1986) ]. | 1 | 5 |
Wilson v. Stategreen1 sentence2013See Wilson, 142 So.3d at 751 (opinion on return to remand); Sharp v. State, 151 So 3d 342, 378 (Ala.Crim.App.2010). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Ex Parte Bird
green
2 sentences2015Ex parte Branch, 526 So.2d 609 (Ala.1987); Ex parte Bird, 594 So.2d 676 (Ala.1991). 2015Ex parte Branch, 526 So.2d 609 (Ala.1987); Ex parte Bird, 594 So.2d 676 (Ala.1991). | 15 | 1997–2015 |
Ex Parte Branch
green
2 sentences2015Ex parte Branch, 526 So.2d 609 (Ala.1987); Ex parte Bird, 594 So.2d 676 (Ala.1991). 2015Ex parte Branch, 526 So.2d 609 (Ala.1987); Ex parte Bird, 594 So.2d 676 (Ala.1991). | 15 | 1997–2015 |
Miller-El v. Cockrell
green
2 sentences2018As explained by the United States Supreme Court in Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322 , 123 S.Ct. 1029 , 154 L.Ed. 2d 931 (2003) : " 'First, a defendant must make a prima facie showing that a peremptory challenge has been exercised on the basis of race [or gender]. [ Batson v. Kentucky ,] 476 U.S. [79,] 96-97[, 106 S.Ct. 1712 , 1723 (1986) ]. 2018As explained by the United States Supreme Court in Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322 , 123 S.Ct. 1029 , 154 L.Ed. 2d 931 (2003) : " 'First, a defendant must make a prima facie showing that a peremptory challenge has been exercised on the basis of race [or gender]. [ Batson v. Kentucky ,] 476 U.S. [79,] 96-97[, 106 S.Ct. 1712 , 1723 (1986) ]. | 6 | 2013–2018 |
Trawick v. Alabama
green
2 sentences2001In Ex parte Trawick, 698 So.2d 162 (Ala.), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 1000 , 118 S.Ct. 568 , 139 L.Ed.2d 408 (1997), the Alabama Supreme Court held: "`A party making a Batson or J.E.B. challenge bears the burden of proving a prima facie case of discrimination and, in the absence of such proof, the prosecution is not required to state its reasons for its peremptory challenges. 2001In Ex parte Trawick, 698 So.2d 162 (Ala.), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 1000 , 118 S.Ct. 568 , 139 L.Ed.2d 408 (1997), the Alabama Supreme Court held: "`A party making a Batson or J.E.B. challenge bears the burden of proving a prima facie case of discrimination and, in the absence of such proof, the prosecution is not required to state its reasons for its peremptory challenges. | 4 | 1999–2001 |
Greene v. Georgia
green
2 sentences2001In Ex parte Trawick, 698 So.2d 162 (Ala.), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 1000 , 118 S.Ct. 568 , 139 L.Ed.2d 408 (1997), the Alabama Supreme Court held: "`A party making a Batson or J.E.B. challenge bears the burden of proving a prima facie case of discrimination and, in the absence of such proof, the prosecution is not required to state its reasons for its peremptory challenges. 1999In Ex parte Trawick, 698 So.2d 162 (Ala.), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 1000 , 118 S.Ct. 568 , 139 L.Ed.2d 408 (1997), the Alabama Supreme Court held: "A party making a Batson or J.E.B. challenge bears the burden of proving a prima facie case of discrimination and, in the absence of such proof, the prosecution is not required to state its reasons for its peremptory challenges. | 3 | 1999–2001 |
Floyd v. State
green
1 sentence2016Ex parte Floyd II, 191 So.3d at 156-160 . | 1 | 2016–2016 |
JEB v. Alabama Ex Rel. TB
green
2 sentences2008"In addressing a similar issue in Ex parte Trawick, 698 So.2d 162 (Ala.1997), the Alabama Supreme Court stated, in pertinent part: "`Trawick first argues that the State used its peremptory challenges to discriminate against female jurors, in violation of J.E.B. v. Alabama, 511 U.S. 127 , 114 S.Ct. 1419 , 128 L.Ed.2d 89 (1994), and that the trial court erred by not requiring the State to articulate its reasons for its strikes of females. 2008"In addressing a similar issue in Ex parte Trawick, 698 So.2d 162 (Ala.1997), the Alabama Supreme Court stated, in pertinent part: "`Trawick first argues that the State used its peremptory challenges to discriminate against female jurors, in violation of J.E.B. v. Alabama, 511 U.S. 127 , 114 S.Ct. 1419 , 128 L.Ed.2d 89 (1994), and that the trial court erred by not requiring the State to articulate its reasons for its strikes of females. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
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.