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.
15 Tennessee opinions name it 3 courts 1992–2026 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Tennessee 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 |
|---|---|---|
Hernandez v. New Yorkgreen2 sentences2026“Both this Court and the United States Supreme Court have previous recognized that “[t]here will seldom be much evidence bearing on th[e] issue [of discriminatory intent], and the best evidence often will be the demeanor of the attorney who exercises the challenge.” Hugueley, 185 S.W.3d at 374 (Tenn. 2006) (quoting Hernandez v. New York, 500 U.S. 352, 365 (1991)). 2016There will seldom be much evidence bearing on that issue, and the best evidence often will be the demeanor of the attorney who exercises the challenge.” Hernandez, 500 U.S. at 365 , 111 S.Ct. at 1869 . | 9 | 15 |
State v. Hugueleygreen2 sentences2026“Both this Court and the United States Supreme Court have previous recognized that “[t]here will seldom be much evidence bearing on th[e] issue [of discriminatory intent], and the best evidence often will be the demeanor of the attorney who exercises the challenge.” Hugueley, 185 S.W.3d at 374 (Tenn. 2006) (quoting Hernandez v. New York, 500 U.S. 352, 365 (1991)). 2012In its determination of whether a peremptory challenge has been exercised on discriminatory grounds, the trial court “‘must carefully articulate specific reasons for each finding on the record, i.e., whether a prima facie case has been established; whether a neutral explanation has been given; and whether the totality of the circumstances support a finding of purposeful discrimination.’” State v. Hugueley, 185 S.W.3d 356, 369 (Tenn. 2006) (quoting Woodson, 916 S.W.2d at 906 ). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Sprattgreen1 sentence2005There will seldom be much evidence bearing on that issue, and the best evidence often will be the demeanor of the attorney who exercises the challenge.” Hernandez, 500 U.S. at 365 , 111 S. Ct. at 1869 . -5- We conclude that the prosecutor’s basis for the use of a peremptory challenge against Ms. Parks was sufficiently race-neutral to withstand a Batson challenge. “‘The central function of the right of peremptory challenge is to enable a litigant to remove a certain number of potential jurors who are not challengeable for cause, but in whom the litigant perceives bias or hostility.’” State v. S | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Richard Annigonigreen1 sentence2005App. 2000) (quoting United States v. Annigoni, 96 F.3d 1132, 1137 (9th Cir. 1996)). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Tennessee. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Batson v. Kentucky
green
2 sentences2012The best evidence of discriminatory intent “‘often will be the demeanor of the attorney who exercises the challenge.’” Id. (quoting Hernandez v. New York, 500 U.S. 352, 365 (1991)). “[T]he ultimate burden of persuasion regarding racial motivation rests with, and never shifts from, the opponent of the strike.” Purkett, 514 U.S. at 768 . 2006Both this Court and the United States Supreme Court have previously recognized that “ ‘[t]here will seldom be much evidence bearing on th[e] issue [of discriminatory intent], and the best evidence often will be the demean- or of the attorney who exercises the challenge.’ ” Id. (quoting Hernandez v. New York, 500 U.S. 852 , 365, 111 S.Ct. 1859 , 114 L.Ed.2d 395 (1991) (plurality opinion)). | 4 | 2005–2012 |
Purkett v. Elem
green
2 sentences2012The best evidence of discriminatory intent “‘often will be the demeanor of the attorney who exercises the challenge.’” Id. (quoting Hernandez v. New York, 500 U.S. 352, 365 (1991)). “[T]he ultimate burden of persuasion regarding racial motivation rests with, and never shifts from, the opponent of the strike.” Purkett, 514 U.S. at 768 . 2005The best evidence of discriminatory intent “‘often will be the demeanor of the attorney who exercises the challenge.’” Id. (quoting Hernandez v. New York, 500 U.S. 352, 365 , 111 S. Ct. 1859, 1869 (1991)). “[T]he ultimate burden of persuasion regarding racial motivation rests with, and never shifts from, the opponent of the strike.” Purkett, 514 U.S. at 768 , 115 S. Ct. at 1771 . | 3 | 2005–2012 |
Woodson v. Porter Brown Limestone Co.
green
2 sentences2012In its determination of whether a peremptory challenge has been exercised on discriminatory grounds, the trial court “‘must carefully articulate specific reasons for each finding on the record, i.e., whether a prima facie case has been established; whether a neutral explanation has been given; and whether the totality of the circumstances support a finding of purposeful discrimination.’” State v. Hugueley, 185 S.W.3d 356, 369 (Tenn. 2006) (quoting Woodson, 916 S.W.2d at 906 ). 2005In its determination of whether a peremptory challenge has been exercised on discriminatory grounds, the trial court “must carefully articulate specific reasons for each finding on the record[.]” -31- Woodson, 916 S.W.2d at 906 . | 2 | 2005–2012 |
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.
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.