Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

State v. Gill

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Decided July 17, 1995No. 2379Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partCureton, Judge

*294Initially, I point out that I agree with the majority’s conclusion that the solicitor’s explanation for striking the black juror because he thought she and Gill once lived on the same street is racially neutral. I do not agree, however, that this racially neutral reason is sufficient to sustain the strike of the black juror if the solicitor’s second reason for the same peremptory strike (the hardship explanation) is found pretextual. As I read the record, the trial judge concluded that inasmuch as the solicitor struck the black juror for a racially neutral reason (lived on the same street as…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. Batson v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Duncan v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  3. Washington v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  4. Swain v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
  5. Castaneda v. PartidaSupreme Court of the United States · 1977

23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API