People v. Lenix
California Supreme Court
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
- Miller-El v. CockrellSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- Batson v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Hernandez v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Swain v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by151 opinions
- People v. ClarkCalifornia Supreme Court · 2016
- The People v. MaiCalifornia Supreme Court · 2013
- People v. CowanCalifornia Supreme Court · 2010
- The People v. JonesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2013
- People v. BookerCalifornia Supreme Court · 2011
146 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.