Legal Opinion
People v. Hutchins
California Court of Appeal
Decided February 20, 2007No. B187104PublishedCited by 4 opinions
[CERTIFIED FOR PARTIAL PUBLICATION*]
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
EPSTEIN, P. J.
Appellant Clifton Hutchins argues the trial court applied an incorrect legal standard to determine whether a peremptory challenge was based on purposeful race discrimination, resulting in violations of People v. Wheeler (1978) 22 Cal.3d 258 [148 Cal.Rptr. 890, 583 P.2d 748] (Wheeler) and Batson v. Kentucky (1986) 476 U.S. 79 [90 L.Ed.2d 69, 106 S.Ct. 1712] (Batson). In the published part of this opinion, we conclude that the trial court applied the wrong standard in making its ruling, requiring conditional reversal. In the unpublished portion of this opinion, we consider…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Batson v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Purkett v. ElemSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- Miller-El v. DretkeSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
- People v. WheelerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
- Johnson v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- People v. BattleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
- People v. KellyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
- People v. Ward CA2/1California Court of Appeal · 2014
- The People v. Johnson CA5California Court of Appeal · 2013