DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Harris, 820 So. 2d 471.

22 citing documents.

  • State of Louisiana v. Lee Turner, Jr. 263 So. 3d 337 La. 2018
    6/21/02), (that potential jurors are challenged on the basis of a claimed bias, without 59 being questioned about such bias, raises a strong inference of exclusion on the basis of race alone); State v. Collier, 553 So.
  • State of Louisiana v. Robert Leroy McCoy 218 So. 3d 535 La. 2016
  • State v. Henderson 135 So. 3d 36 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    State v. Harris, 2001-0408, p. 4 (La.6/21/02), .
  • State v. Harris 105 So. 3d 914 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2012
    State v. Harris, 01-0408 (La.6/21/02); .
  • State of Louisiana v. Robert Daniel Wilkins La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
  • State v. Wilkins 94 So. 3d 983 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    In support of his argument, Defendant cites State v. Harris, 01-408 (La.6/21/02), .
  • State v. Dressner 45 So. 3d 127 La. 2010
    State v. Harris, 01-0408 (La.6/21/02), .
  • State v. Coleman 970 So. 2d 511 La. 2007
    State v. Harris, 01-0408 (La.6/21/02), ; Purkett v. Elem, 514 U.S. 765 , 115 S.Ct.
  • State v. Harris 966 So. 2d 1038 La. 2007
    State v. Harris, 01-0408 (La.6/21/02), .
  • State v. Jones 940 So. 2d 61 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
    In State v. Harris, XXXX-XXXX (La.6/21/02), , the supreme court explained the Batson process: Both in this state and throughout the nation, the law is firmly settled that peremptory strikes may not be based on race in either criminal or civil cases.
  • State v. Snyder 942 So. 2d 484 La. 2006
    See State v. Harris, 01-0408, p. 8 (La.6/21/02), (The comparison of the treatment of the potential jurors of different races has been utilized by this court in a measurement of the racially-neutral reason for the exercise of the prosecution's challenge.)
  • State v. Juniors 915 So. 2d 291 La. 2005
    [10] Cf., e.g., State v. Harris, 01-0408, p. 9 (La.6/21/02), , where the prosecutor stated that she was challenging the prospective juror because he was the "only single black male in panel with no children," thereby explicitly placing race at issue, and Tyler , 97-0338 at 7, 723 So.2d at 944 , where defense counsel specifically objected to a second jury coming in because
  • State v. Magee 916 So. 2d 191 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2005
    State v. Harris, 2001-0408, p. 4 (La.6/21/02), .
  • State v. Givens 888 So. 2d 329 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2004
    State v. Harris, XXXX-XXXX (La.6/21/02), , is cited for the proposition that a neutral characteristic, such as childlessness, is not a sufficient reason to strike an African-American when it was not used to strike Caucasians.
  • State of Louisiana v. Damian S. Burgess La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
  • State v. Burgess 876 So. 2d 263 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
    State v. Harris, 01-0408, pp. 7-8 (La.6/21/02), -76 .
  • State v. Bailey 875 So. 2d 949 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
    In State v. Harris, 01-408 (La.6/21/02), , the Louisiana Supreme Court was faced with a similar issue of whether the State's explanation for excluding a prospective juror because he lived near the crime was a pretext for race.
  • State v. Alexander 871 So. 2d 483 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
    [8] Compare, State v. Harris, 01-408, pp. 6-8 (La.6/21/02), -476 , which held that the State's explanation for excluding a prospective juror based on living near the crime was a pretext for race, where the prosecutor first said that the prospective juror should be excluded because he was "the only single black male on the panel with no children."
  • State v. Legrand 864 So. 2d 89 La. 2004
    State v. Harris, 01-0408 (La.6/21/02), .
  • State v. Stewart 866 So. 2d 1016 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
    In State v. Harris, 01-0408 (La.6/21/02), , the State proffered that it was striking venireperson Brown because he was single and had no children.
  • State v. Perrilloux 864 So. 2d 843 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
    at 1722, 90 L.Ed.2d at 86; State v. Harris, 01-408 (La.6/24/02), .
  • State v. Trotter 852 So. 2d 1247 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
    In reversing the conviction under Batson in State v. Harris, 01-0408 (La.6/21/02), , the court stated: The state also proffered that it was striking Brown because he was single and had no children.