race-based peremptory challenge (North Carolina) · Go Syfert
← North Carolina issues

race-based peremptory challenge in North Carolina

11 North Carolina opinions name it 2 courts 2005–2023 5 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by North Carolina 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.

Followed or applied (2)

CaseFollowedCited
State v. Taylorgreen
nc · 2008 · cited in 9 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2010–2023
2 sentences

2023Put differently, a Batson analysis consists of a three-step process: “First, the defendant must make a prima facie showing that the [S]tate exercised a race- based peremptory challenge.” State v. Taylor, 362 N.C. 514, 527 (2008).

2023Thus, a Batson analysis consists of three steps: “First, the defendant must make a prima facie showing that the [S]tate exercised a race-based peremptory challenge.” State v. Taylor, 362 N.C. 514, 527 (2008).

79
Johnson v. Californiagreen
scotus · 2005 · cited in 3 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2022–2022
2 sentences

2022CLEGG 2022-NCSC-11 Opinion of the Court Snyder, 552 U.S. at 476 ; see Taylor, 362 N.C. at 527 (“First, the defendant must make a prima facie showing that the state exercised a race-based peremptory challenge”). “[A] defendant satisfies the requirements of Batson’s first step by producing evidence sufficient to permit the trial judge to draw an inference that discrimination has occurred.” Johnson, 545 U.S. at 170 ; see State v. Hobbs, 374 N.C. 345 , 350 (2020) (quoting Johnson for this proposition).

2022CLEGG 2022-NCSC-11 Opinion of the Court Snyder, 552 U.S. at 476 ; see Taylor, 362 N.C. at 527 (“First, the defendant must make a prima facie showing that the state exercised a race-based peremptory challenge”). “[A] defendant satisfies the requirements of Batson’s first step by producing evidence sufficient to permit the trial judge to draw an inference that discrimination has occurred.” Johnson, 545 U.S. at 170 ; see State v. Hobbs, 374 N.C. 345 , 350 (2020) (quoting Johnson for this proposition).

33

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in North Carolina. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (4)

CaseCitedYears
Snyder v. Louisiana green
scotus · 2008
2 sentences

2022CLEGG 2022-NCSC-11 Opinion of the Court Snyder, 552 U.S. at 476 ; see Taylor, 362 N.C. at 527 (“First, the defendant must make a prima facie showing that the state exercised a race-based peremptory challenge”). “[A] defendant satisfies the requirements of Batson’s first step by producing evidence sufficient to permit the trial judge to draw an inference that discrimination has occurred.” Johnson, 545 U.S. at 170 ; see State v. Hobbs, 374 N.C. 345 , 350 (2020) (quoting Johnson for this proposition).

2022CLEGG 2022-NCSC-11 Opinion of the Court Snyder, 552 U.S. at 476 ; see Taylor, 362 N.C. at 527 (“First, the defendant must make a prima facie showing that the state exercised a race-based peremptory challenge”). “[A] defendant satisfies the requirements of Batson’s first step by producing evidence sufficient to permit the trial judge to draw an inference that discrimination has occurred.” Johnson, 545 U.S. at 170 ; see State v. Hobbs, 374 N.C. 345 , 350 (2020) (quoting Johnson for this proposition).

32022–2022
Batson v. Kentucky green
scotus · 1986
2 sentences

2010Ed. 2d at 83 , 106 S. Ct. at 1719 , the United States Supreme Court explained that “the Equal Protection Clause forbids the prosecutor to challenge potential jurors solely on account of their race or oh the assumption that black jurors as a group will be unable impartially to consider the State’s case against a black defendant.” Our Supreme Court has construed Batson as outlining a “three-part test for determining whether the state impermissibly excluded a juror on the basis of race”: (1) “the defendant must make a prima facie showing that the state exercised a race-based peremptory challenge”

2008Augustine, 359 N.C. at 715 , 616 S.E.2d at 522 (citing Batson, 476 U.S. at 96-97 ).

32005–2010
State v. James green
ncctapp · 2013
2 sentences

2016James , 230 N.C.App. at 349 , 750 S.E.2d at 854 .

2016James , 230 N.C.App. at 349 , 750 S.E.2d at 854 .

12016–2016
State v. Augustine green
nc · 2005
2 sentences

2008Augustine, 359 N.C. at 715 , 616 S.E.2d at 522 (citing Batson, 476 U.S. at 96-97 ).

2008Augustine, 359 N.C. at 715 , 616 S.E.2d at 522 (citing Batson, 476 U.S. at 96-97 ).

12008–2008

Statutes the citing opinions construe

NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1335 (3) NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-2000 (3) NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-30 (3) NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-31 (3)

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.

Where else courts name it

NC 11 (2005–2023) IN 4 (2001–2020) NV 3 (2018–2018) FL 3 (1998–2005) MI 2 (2005–2005) CA 2 (1996–2013) TN 2 (2002–2022) IL 2 (1992–2022) TX 2 (2004–2004)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check