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.
6 Iowa opinions name it 2 courts 2015–2024 3 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Iowa 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 sentences2023But, as the district court seemed to recognize after the recess, “[t]he prosecutor’s explanation [for a peremptory strike] ‘need not rise to the level justifying exercise of a challenge for cause.’ ” State v. Griffin, 564 N.W.2d 370, 375 (Iowa 1997) (quoting Batson, 476 U.S. at 97 ). 11 preliminary issue of whether [Booker] ha[s] made a prima facie showing [is] moot.” Mootz, 808 N.W.2d at 218 (quoting Hernandez v. New York, 500 U.S. 352, 359 (1991)). 2023But, as the district court seemed to recognize after the recess, “[t]he prosecutor’s explanation [for a peremptory strike] ‘need not rise to the level justifying exercise of a challenge for cause.’ ” State v. Griffin, 564 N.W.2d 370, 375 (Iowa 1997) (quoting Batson, 476 U.S. at 97 ). 11 preliminary issue of whether [Booker] ha[s] made a prima facie showing [is] moot.” Mootz, 808 N.W.2d at 218 (quoting Hernandez v. New York, 500 U.S. 352, 359 (1991)). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Griffingreen2 sentences2023But, as the district court seemed to recognize after the recess, “[t]he prosecutor’s explanation [for a peremptory strike] ‘need not rise to the level justifying exercise of a challenge for cause.’ ” State v. Griffin, 564 N.W.2d 370, 375 (Iowa 1997) (quoting Batson, 476 U.S. at 97 ). 11 preliminary issue of whether [Booker] ha[s] made a prima facie showing [is] moot.” Mootz, 808 N.W.2d at 218 (quoting Hernandez v. New York, 500 U.S. 352, 359 (1991)). 2023But, as the district court seemed to recognize after the recess, “[t]he prosecutor’s explanation [for a peremptory strike] ‘need not rise to the level justifying exercise of a challenge for cause.’ ” State v. Griffin, 564 N.W.2d 370, 375 (Iowa 1997) (quoting Batson, 476 U.S. at 97 ). 11 preliminary issue of whether [Booker] ha[s] made a prima facie showing [is] moot.” Mootz, 808 N.W.2d at 218 (quoting Hernandez v. New York, 500 U.S. 352, 359 (1991)). | 2 | 2 |
Johnson v. City of Waterloogreen2 sentences2023See Johnson v. City of Waterloo, 119 N.W. 70, 71 (Iowa 1909) (collecting cases for support of the proposition that “though a qualified juror be excused, another 20 equally competent and fair minded will be selected in his stead, and, if a competent and impartial jury is finally secured before whom the cause is tried, neither party is in a situation to complain”); see also N. Pac. 2023See Johnson v. City of Waterloo, 119 N.W. 70, 71 (Iowa 1909) (collecting cases for support of the proposition that “though a qualified juror be excused, another equally competent and fair minded will be selected in his stead, and, if a competent and impartial jury is finally secured before whom the cause is tried, neither party is in a situation to complain”); see also N. Pac. | 2 | 2 |
State v. Jonasgreen2 sentences2023Although we have recently eased the burden on a party seeking to establish prejudice from an erroneous denial of a for-cause challenge, see Jonas, 904 N.W.2d at 570–71, it has been long-settled in Iowa (and across the country generally) that in order to establish prejudice from the erroneous grant of a for-cause challenge a party must show that “the resulting jury was not impartial and competent,” Summy, 708 N.W.2d at 339– 40. 2023Although we have recently eased the burden on a party seeking to establish prejudice from an erroneous denial of a for-cause challenge, see Jonas, 904 N.W.2d at 570–71, it has been long-settled in Iowa (and across the country generally) that in order to establish prejudice from the erroneous grant of a for-cause challenge a party must show that “the resulting jury was not impartial and competent,” Summy, 708 N.W.2d at 339– 40. | 1 | 3 |
State v. Hattergreen1 sentence2020As to panelist F., Doorenbos claims the grandfather’s situation qualifies as a for-cause challenge.8 See State v. Hatter, 381 N.W.2d 370, 372 (Iowa Ct. App. 1985) (holding district court should have sustained challenge for cause to panelist who was rape victim in jury selection for sexual abuse prosecution). | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Forriss D. Elliottgreen1 sentence2016See United States v. Elliott, 89 F.3d 1360, 1364-65 (8th Cir. 1996) (“Batson applies only to peremptory strikes. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Dicksongreen1 sentence2015See State v. Hardin, 498 N.W.2d 677, 681 (Iowa 1993) (stating that ruling on for cause challenge is “vulnerable only upon proof that the court abused the broad discretion granted in such matters”); 24 State v. Jones, 464 N.W.2d 241, 242-43 (Iowa 1990) (stating the district court has broad discretion in ruling on for cause challenges); State v. Dickson, 202 N.W. 225, 227 (Iowa 1925) (“A trial court necessarily must exercise a judicial discretion in questions of this character. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Jonesgreen1 sentence2015See State v. Hardin, 498 N.W.2d 677, 681 (Iowa 1993) (stating that ruling on for cause challenge is “vulnerable only upon proof that the court abused the broad discretion granted in such matters”); 24 State v. Jones, 464 N.W.2d 241, 242-43 (Iowa 1990) (stating the district court has broad discretion in ruling on for cause challenges); State v. Dickson, 202 N.W. 225, 227 (Iowa 1925) (“A trial court necessarily must exercise a judicial discretion in questions of this character. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Hardingreen1 sentence2015See State v. Hardin, 498 N.W.2d 677, 681 (Iowa 1993) (stating that ruling on for cause challenge is “vulnerable only upon proof that the court abused the broad discretion granted in such matters”); 24 State v. Jones, 464 N.W.2d 241, 242-43 (Iowa 1990) (stating the district court has broad discretion in ruling on for cause challenges); State v. Dickson, 202 N.W. 225, 227 (Iowa 1925) (“A trial court necessarily must exercise a judicial discretion in questions of this character. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Iowa. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Batson v. Kentucky
green
2 sentences2023Booker appealed, and we transferred the case to the court of appeals to address his appellate challenges, including, inter alia: (1) neither the conviction nor the sentencing enhancement was supported by sufficient evidence; (2) the court erroneously overruled a Batson challenge1 to one of the State’s peremptory strikes; (3) the court erroneously granted the State’s for-cause challenge to another juror; and (4) the court lacked jurisdiction to enter a nunc pro tunc order 1See Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986). 5 amending Booker’s sentence after he filed his notice of appeal. 2023Booker appealed, and we transferred the case to the court of appeals to address his appellate challenges, including, inter alia: (1) neither the conviction nor the sentencing enhancement was supported by sufficient evidence; (2) the court erroneously overruled a Batson challenge1 to one of the State’s peremptory strikes; (3) the court erroneously granted the State’s for-cause challenge to another juror; and (4) the court lacked jurisdiction to enter a nunc pro tunc order 1See Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986). 5 amending Booker’s sentence after he filed his notice of appeal. | 2 | 2023–2023 |
Summy v. City of Des Moines
green
2 sentences2023Although we have recently eased the burden on a party seeking to establish prejudice from an erroneous denial of a for-cause challenge, see Jonas, 904 N.W.2d at 570–71, it has been long-settled in Iowa (and across the country generally) that in order to establish prejudice from the erroneous grant of a for-cause challenge a party must show that “the resulting jury was not impartial and competent,” Summy, 708 N.W.2d at 339– 40. 2023Although we have recently eased the burden on a party seeking to establish prejudice from an erroneous denial of a for-cause challenge, see Jonas, 904 N.W.2d at 570–71, it has been long-settled in Iowa (and across the country generally) that in order to establish prejudice from the erroneous grant of a for-cause challenge a party must show that “the resulting jury was not impartial and competent,” Summy, 708 N.W.2d at 339– 40. | 2 | 2023–2023 |
State of Iowa v. Jerin Douglas Mootz
green
2 sentences2023But, as the district court seemed to recognize after the recess, “[t]he prosecutor’s explanation [for a peremptory strike] ‘need not rise to the level justifying exercise of a challenge for cause.’ ” State v. Griffin, 564 N.W.2d 370, 375 (Iowa 1997) (quoting Batson, 476 U.S. at 97 ). 11 preliminary issue of whether [Booker] ha[s] made a prima facie showing [is] moot.” Mootz, 808 N.W.2d at 218 (quoting Hernandez v. New York, 500 U.S. 352, 359 (1991)). 2023But, as the district court seemed to recognize after the recess, “[t]he prosecutor’s explanation [for a peremptory strike] ‘need not rise to the level justifying exercise of a challenge for cause.’ ” State v. Griffin, 564 N.W.2d 370, 375 (Iowa 1997) (quoting Batson, 476 U.S. at 97 ). 11 preliminary issue of whether [Booker] ha[s] made a prima facie showing [is] moot.” Mootz, 808 N.W.2d at 218 (quoting Hernandez v. New York, 500 U.S. 352, 359 (1991)). | 2 | 2023–2023 |
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.