No. 19-8332

Robert Boyd Rhoades v. California

Lower Court: California
Docketed: 2020-04-22
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Relisted (4)IFP
Tags: batson-challenge civil-rights due-process equal-protection jury-selection peremptory-challenge peremptory-challenges racial-discrimination
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw DueProcess FifthAmendment Punishment HabeasCorpus Privacy JusticiabilityDoctri Jurisdiction
Latest Conference: 2020-10-30 (distributed 4 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the California Supreme Court erred in ruling that the trial court properly declined to find an inference of discrimination at step one of Batson v. Kentucky

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

Question Presented 1. Whether, by hypothesizing reasons the prosecutors might have had to use half of their peremptory challenges to excuse all four prospective African-American jurors, the California Supreme Court erred in ruling that the trial court properly declined to find an inference of discrimination at step one of Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986) (Batson), in direct contradiction to Johnson v. California, 545 U.S. 162 (2005) (Johnson). i

Docket Entries

2021-02-23
Record returned to the Supreme Court of California (14 boxes).
2020-11-02
Petition DENIED. Justice Barrett took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
2020-10-26
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/30/2020.
2020-10-13
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/16/2020.
2020-10-13
Rescheduled.
2020-09-24
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/9/2020.
2020-09-24
Rescheduled.
2020-09-14
Record received from the Supreme Court of California (14 boxes).
2020-08-13
Record Requested.
2020-07-02
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2020.
2020-06-17
Brief of respondent California in opposition filed.
2020-05-11
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including June 22, 2020.
2020-05-08
Motion to extend the time to file a response from May 22, 2020 to June 22, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.
2020-04-16
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due May 22, 2020)

Attorneys

California
Jennifer Mary PoeOffice of the Attorney General, California Departm, Respondent
Jennifer Mary PoeOffice of the Attorney General, California Departm, Respondent
Robert Rhoades
Richard Jay MollerSo'Hum Law Center of Richard Jay Moller, Petitioner
Richard Jay MollerSo'Hum Law Center of Richard Jay Moller, Petitioner