exercise of a peremptory challenge (South Carolina) · Go Syfert
← South Carolina issues

exercise of a peremptory challenge in South Carolina

7 South Carolina opinions name it 2 courts 1982–2025 3 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by South 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 (4)

CaseFollowedCited
State v. Coaxumgreen
sc · 2014 · cited in 3 South Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2024–2025
2 sentences

2025"Should jurors give false or misleading answers during voir dire, the parties may mistakenly seat a juror who could have been excused by the court, challenged for cause by counsel, or stricken through the exercise of a peremptory challenge." State v. Coaxum, 410 S.C. 320, 327, 764 S.E.2d 242, 245 (2014), overruled on other grounds by Rowell, 444 S.C. at 116, 906 S.E.2d at 557.

2025"Should jurors give false or misleading answers during voir dire, the parties may mistakenly seat a juror who could have been excused by the court, challenged for cause by counsel, or stricken through the exercise of a peremptory challenge." State v. Coaxum, 410 S.C. 320, 327, 764 S.E.2d 242, 245 (2014), overruled on other grounds by Rowell, 444 S.C. at 116, 906 S.E.2d at 557.

33
Payton v. Kearsegreen
sc · 1998 · cited in 2 South Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2006–2007
2 sentences

2007See Payton v. Kearse, 329 S.C. 51 , 495 S.E.2d 205 (1998) (a discriminatory explana *567 tion for the exercise of a peremptory challenge will vitiate other nondiscriminatory explanations for the strike).

2007See Payton v. Kearse, 329 S.C. 51 , 495 S.E.2d 205 (1998) (a discriminatory explana *567 tion for the exercise of a peremptory challenge will vitiate other nondiscriminatory explanations for the strike).

12
State v. Kellygreen
sc · 1998 · cited in 1 South Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2024–2024
2 sentences

2024Code Ann. §§ 16-11-410 to -450 (2016). should exhaust other methods to cure possible prejudice before aborting a trial."' (quoting State v. Kelly, 331 S.C. 132, 141-42 , 502 S.E.2d 99, 104 (1998))). 2 During voir dire, the trial court instructed the prospective jurors to notify the court if any juror or an immediate family member was the victim of a violent crime; 3 if any juror or his or her immediate family attend or had ever attended New Life Deliverance Worship Center (the Church); or if a juror has ". . . any connection by blood or marriage . . . work, school,[4] or church" or otherwise "

2024Code Ann. §§ 16-11-410 to -450 (2016). should exhaust other methods to cure possible prejudice before aborting a trial."' (quoting State v. Kelly, 331 S.C. 132, 141-42 , 502 S.E.2d 99, 104 (1998))). 2 During voir dire, the trial court instructed the prospective jurors to notify the court if any juror or an immediate family member was the victim of a violent crime; 3 if any juror or his or her immediate family attend or had ever attended New Life Deliverance Worship Center (the Church); or if a juror has ". . . any connection by blood or marriage . . . work, school,[4] or church" or otherwise "

11
State v. Gulledgegreen
sc · 1982 · cited in 1 South Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2014–2014
2 sentences

2014State v. Gulledge, 277 S.C. 368, 371 , 287 S.E.2d 488, 490 (1982).

2014State v. Gulledge, 277 S.C. 368, 371 , 287 S.E.2d 488, 490 (1982).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

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

Also cited on this issue (1)

CaseCitedYears
Crosby v. Southeast Zayre, Inc. green
sc · 1980
1 sentence

1982Crosby v. Southeast vayre, Inc., 274 S. C. 519, 265 S. E. (2d) 517 (1980) and, depending upon the facts and circumstances, subject to challenge for cause or the exercise of a peremptory challenge.

11982–1982

Where else courts name it

CA 56 (1928–2026) FL 37 (1967–2026) LA 26 (1941–2017) IL 25 (1981–2022) TX 23 (1974–2013) NY 21 (1980–2021) NJ 19 (1976–2025) GA 16 (1996–2017) OH 16 (1992–2022) MN 15 (1990–2019) MA 12 (1998–2025) MS 11 (1995–2024) NV 10 (2011–2019) UT 8 (1988–2014) PA 7 (1967–2018) MO 7 (1975–2018) WA 7 (2001–2018) SC 7 (1982–2025) IN 7 (1984–2015) DC 6 (1982–1997) AL 6 (1990–2003) AZ 5 (1915–1989) MI 4 (2015–2021) CT 4 (1999–2006) KY 3 (2003–2007) IA 3 (2017–2019) AR 3 (1997–2015) TN 3 (2007–2019) NC 3 (1975–1997) OR 2 (2024–2024) WI 2 (2004–2012) CO 2 (1985–2014) MD 2 (1989–1989) OK 2 (1994–1998)

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