Legal Opinion

People v. Lenix

California Supreme Court

Decided July 24, 2008No. S148029PublishedCited by 151 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

CORRIGAN, J.

Here we determine whether an appellate court must perform a comparative juror analysis for the first time on appeal to evaluate whether the advocate’s stated reasons for peremptorily challenging prospective jurors are truthful or pretextual. (See People v. Wheeler (1978) 22 Cal.3d 258 [148 Cal.Rptr. 890, 583 P.2d 748] (Wheeler); Batson v. Kentucky (1986) 476 U.S. 79 [90 L.Ed.2d 69, 106 S.Ct. 1712] (Batson).) The United States Supreme Court conducted such a comparative analysis for the first time on appeal in Miller-El v. Dretke (2005) 545 U.S. 231 [162 L.Ed.2d 196, 125…

2Cases cited44 opinions

  1. Miller-El v. CockrellSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
  2. Batson v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
  4. Hernandez v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  5. Swain v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1965

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

3Cited by151 opinions

  1. People v. ClarkCalifornia Supreme Court · 2016
  2. The People v. MaiCalifornia Supreme Court · 2013
  3. People v. CowanCalifornia Supreme Court · 2010
  4. The People v. JonesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2013
  5. People v. BookerCalifornia Supreme Court · 2011

146 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