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.
16 Georgia opinions name it 2 courts 1996–2017 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Georgia 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 |
|---|---|---|
Turner v. Stategreen2 sentences2010A trial court may . .. determine that improper discriminatory motive underlay the exercise of a peremptory challenge when the race-neutral explanation proffered by the strikes’ proponent is so implausible or fantastic that it renders the explanation pretextual. [Cits.] The trial court’s findings concerning whether the opponent of the strike has carried the burden of persuasion are entitled to great deference and will be affirmed unless clearly erroneous. [Cit.] Turner v. State, 267 Ga. 149, 151 (2) ( 476 SE2d 252 ) (1996). 2010A trial court may . .. determine that improper discriminatory motive underlay the exercise of a peremptory challenge when the race-neutral explanation proffered by the strikes’ proponent is so implausible or fantastic that it renders the explanation pretextual. [Cits.] The trial court’s findings concerning whether the opponent of the strike has carried the burden of persuasion are entitled to great deference and will be affirmed unless clearly erroneous. [Cit.] Turner v. State, 267 Ga. 149, 151 (2) ( 476 SE2d 252 ) (1996). | 4 | 5 |
Lewis v. Stategreen2 sentences2017See also Lewis v. State, 262 Ga. 679, 680 (2) ( 424 SE2d 626 ) (1993) (“The exercise of a peremptory challenge must not be based on either the race of the juror or the racial stereotypes held by the party.”) (punctuation omitted). 13 The State argued in part that famous Olympic swimmer Ryan Lochte’s notorious display of a “grill” during the 2016 Summer Olympics shows that some 8 stereotype associated with African Americans.14 The existence of this stereotype was white people also have gold teeth because Lochte is white. 2017See also Lewis v. State, 262 Ga. 679, 680 (2) ( 424 SE2d 626 ) (1993) (“The exercise of a peremptory challenge must not be based on either the race of the juror or the racial stereotypes held by the party.”) (punctuation omitted). 13 The State argued in part that famous Olympic swimmer Ryan Lochte’s notorious display of a “grill” during the 2016 Summer Olympics shows that some 8 stereotype associated with African Americans.14 The existence of this stereotype was white people also have gold teeth because Lochte is white. | 2 | 4 |
Toomer v. Stategreen2 sentences2014And the “proffer of a pretextual explanation naturally gives rise to an inference of discriminatory intent.” (Citation and punctuation omitted.) Toomer v. State, 292 Ga. 49, 55 (2) (b) ( 734 SE2d 333 ) (2012). 2014And the “proffer of a pretextual explanation naturally gives rise to an inference of discriminatory intent.” (Citation and punctuation omitted.) Toomer v. State, 292 Ga. 49, 55 (2) (b) ( 734 SE2d 333 ) (2012). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Adamsgreen2 sentences1997"A trial court may also determine that improper discriminatory motive underlay the exercise of a peremptory challenge when the race-neutral explanation proffered by the strikes' proponent is so implausible or fantastic that it renders the explanation pretextual." Turner v. State, 267 Ga. 149 , 476 S.E.2d 252 (1996); State v. Adams, 322 S.C. 114 , 470 S.E.2d 366, 372 (1996); see also Gamble v. State, 257 Ga. 325 (5), 357 S.E.2d 792 (1987). 1997"A trial court may also determine that improper discriminatory motive underlay the exercise of a peremptory challenge when the race-neutral explanation proffered by the strikes' proponent is so implausible or fantastic that it renders the explanation pretextual." Turner v. State, 267 Ga. 149 , 476 S.E.2d 252 (1996); State v. Adams, 322 S.C. 114 , 470 S.E.2d 366, 372 (1996); see also Gamble v. State, 257 Ga. 325 (5), 357 S.E.2d 792 (1987). | 2 | 2 |
Guzman v. Stategreen2 sentences2014“A venire member’s prior negative experience with law enforcement officers is a race-neutral reason supporting the exercise of a peremptory challenge.” Guzman v. State, 287 Ga. 759, 762 (2) ( 700 SE2d 340 ) (2010). 2014“A venire member’s prior negative experience with law enforcement officers is a race-neutral reason supporting the exercise of a peremptory challenge.” Guzman v. State, 287 Ga. 759, 762 (2) ( 700 SE2d 340 ) (2010). | 1 | 1 |
Quillian v. Stategreen2 sentences2014Further, “[t]he State may reasonably base its use of a peremptory strike upon a prospective juror’s apparent belief that, in general, law enforcement officers are racially motivated.” Quillian v. State, 279 Ga. 698, 701 (3) ( 620 SE2d 376 ) (2005). 2. 2014Further, “[t]he State may reasonably base its use of a peremptory strike upon a prospective juror’s apparent belief that, in general, law enforcement officers are racially motivated.” Quillian v. State, 279 Ga. 698, 701 (3) ( 620 SE2d 376 ) (2005). 2. | 1 | 1 |
Gamble v. Stategreen2 sentences1997"A trial court may also determine that improper discriminatory motive underlay the exercise of a peremptory challenge when the race-neutral explanation proffered by the strikes' proponent is so implausible or fantastic that it renders the explanation pretextual." Turner v. State, 267 Ga. 149 , 476 S.E.2d 252 (1996); State v. Adams, 322 S.C. 114 , 470 S.E.2d 366, 372 (1996); see also Gamble v. State, 257 Ga. 325 (5), 357 S.E.2d 792 (1987). 1997"A trial court may also determine that improper discriminatory motive underlay the exercise of a peremptory challenge when the race-neutral explanation proffered by the strikes' proponent is so implausible or fantastic that it renders the explanation pretextual." Turner v. State, 267 Ga. 149 , 476 S.E.2d 252 (1996); State v. Adams, 322 S.C. 114 , 470 S.E.2d 366, 372 (1996); see also Gamble v. State, 257 Ga. 325 (5), 357 S.E.2d 792 (1987). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Bryantgreen1 sentence1996Purkett v. Elem, supra, 115 SC at 1771; State v. Adams, 470 SE2d 366, 372 (S.C. 1996); State v. Bryant, 662 NE2d 846, 850, n. 1 (Ohio App. 1995). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Georgia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Henry v. State
green
2 sentences1999Henry v. State, 265 Ga. 732 (2), 462 S.E.2d 737 (1995). 1999Henry v. State, 265 Ga. 732 (2), 462 S.E.2d 737 (1995). | 2 | 1996–1999 |
Crowder v. State
green
2 sentences2010Crowder v. State, 268 Ga. 517 (4) ( 491 SE2d 323 ) (1997). 2010Crowder v. State, 268 Ga. 517 (4) ( 491 SE2d 323 ) (1997). | 1 | 2010–2010 |
Flanders v. State
green
2 sentences2010Flanders v. State, 279 Ga. 35 (2), 609 S.E.2d 346 (2005). 2010Flanders v. State, 279 Ga. 35 (2), 609 S.E.2d 346 (2005). | 1 | 2010–2010 |
Georgia v. McCollum
green
2 sentences2005Because I recognize that a trial court's decision with regard to challenged peremptory strikes is entitled to great deference by a reviewing court, I urge trial courts faced with "the practical difficulty of ferreting out discrimination in selections discretionary by nature and choices subject to myriad legitimate influences," ( Miller-El v. Dretke, ___ U.S. ___ 125 S.Ct. 2317, 2324 , 162 L.Ed.2d 196 (2005)), to remember that "the exercise of a peremptory challenge must not be based on either the race of the juror or the racial stereotypes held by the party." Georgia v. McCollum, 505 U.S. 42 , 2005Because I recognize that a trial court's decision with regard to challenged peremptory strikes is entitled to great deference by a reviewing court, I urge trial courts faced with "the practical difficulty of ferreting out discrimination in selections discretionary by nature and choices subject to myriad legitimate influences," ( Miller-El v. Dretke, ___ U.S. ___ 125 S.Ct. 2317, 2324 , 162 L.Ed.2d 196 (2005)), to remember that "the exercise of a peremptory challenge must not be based on either the race of the juror or the racial stereotypes held by the party." Georgia v. McCollum, 505 U.S. 42 , | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Miller-El v. Dretke
green
2 sentences2005Because I recognize that a trial court's decision with regard to challenged peremptory strikes is entitled to great deference by a reviewing court, I urge trial courts faced with "the practical difficulty of ferreting out discrimination in selections discretionary by nature and choices subject to myriad legitimate influences," ( Miller-El v. Dretke, ___ U.S. ___ 125 S.Ct. 2317, 2324 , 162 L.Ed.2d 196 (2005)), to remember that "the exercise of a peremptory challenge must not be based on either the race of the juror or the racial stereotypes held by the party." Georgia v. McCollum, 505 U.S. 42 , 2005Because I recognize that a trial court's decision with regard to challenged peremptory strikes is entitled to great deference by a reviewing court, I urge trial courts faced with "the practical difficulty of ferreting out discrimination in selections discretionary by nature and choices subject to myriad legitimate influences," ( Miller-El v. Dretke, ___ U.S. ___ 125 S.Ct. 2317, 2324 , 162 L.Ed.2d 196 (2005)), to remember that "the exercise of a peremptory challenge must not be based on either the race of the juror or the racial stereotypes held by the party." Georgia v. McCollum, 505 U.S. 42 , | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Batson v. Kentucky
green
2 sentences1997Although we must insure that peremptory strikes are not exercised for racially-motivated reasons, the presence of one potentially racially-motivated explanation does not tarnish jury selection under Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 , 106 S.Ct. 1712 , 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986) in those situations where counsel gives multiple reasons justifying the exercise of a peremptory challenge against a particular venireperson and those reasons include a racially-neutral explanation for striking the juror which is not itself a pretext for removing the juror for the racially-discriminatory reason. 1997Although we must insure that peremptory strikes are not exercised for racially-motivated reasons, the presence of one potentially racially-motivated explanation does not tarnish jury selection under Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 , 106 S.Ct. 1712 , 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986) in those situations where counsel gives multiple reasons justifying the exercise of a peremptory challenge against a particular venireperson and those reasons include a racially-neutral explanation for striking the juror which is not itself a pretext for removing the juror for the racially-discriminatory reason. | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Lingo v. State
green
1 sentence1997Lingo v. State, supra at 668-669, 437 S.E.2d 463 . | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Purkett v. Elem
green
1 sentence1996Purkett v. Elem, supra, 115 SC at 1771; State v. Adams, 470 SE2d 366, 372 (S.C. 1996); State v. Bryant, 662 NE2d 846, 850, n. 1 (Ohio App. 1995). | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.