Legal Opinion

United States v. Rutledge

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

Decided August 8, 2011No. 10-2734PublishedCited by 42 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WOOD, Circuit Judge.

At the jury selection preceding Anthony Rutledge’s criminal trial, the prosecutor used peremptory challenges to strike the only two African-American members in the venire. Suspecting that these actions violated the Equal Protection Clause, Rutledge’s attorney objected to the strikes using the three-step procedure established in Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986).

This appeal focuses solely on Bat-son’s third step, which requires the district court to make a finding of fact regarding the prosecutor’s credibility after the prosecutor has…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Miller-El v. CockrellSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
  2. Batson v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1998
  4. Powers v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  5. Purkett v. ElemSupreme Court of the United States · 1995

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

3Cited by42 opinions

  1. Steven Lisle, Jr. v. William WelbornCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2019
  2. Jimenez v. City of ChicagoCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2013
  3. Clifton Morgan v. City of ChicagoCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2016
  4. Harris v. HardyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2012
  5. Williams v. StateNevada Supreme Court · 2018

37 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