People v. Bolling
New York Court of Appeals
1ConcurrenceBellacosa, J.
We concur in the result and in Judge Simons’ opinion, but write separately to express a broader concern and perspective.
*326We agree that ”[t]he purpose of the Batson [Batson v Kentucky, 476 US 79] rule is to eliminate discrimination, not minimize it” (majority opn, at 321). The Court’s conclusions are correct — in this case, Bolling, the prosecutor should have been required to give racially neutral reasons to rebut defendant’s prima facie case of discriminatory peremptory strikes, and in Steele the defendant failed to establish a prima facie case. We agree with these results because People v…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Batson v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Hernandez v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Swain v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Powers v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Shelley v. KraemerSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.