No. 21-6008
Response RequestedResponse WaivedRelisted (2)IFP
Tags: appellate-review batson-challenge comparative-juror-analysis criminal-procedure equal-protection jury-selection racial-discrimination standard-of-review trial-procedure
Key Terms:
DueProcess HabeasCorpus
DueProcess HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2022-01-07
(distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a trial court must make express rulings at Batson's third step
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED For over a decade now, Courts have found themselves intractably divided on two important issues regarding the enforcement of Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986), both squarely presented in this Petition: 1. Whether a trial court must make express rulings at Batson’s third step. 2. Whether an appellate court should consider a comparative juror analysis presented for the first time on appeal. ii
Docket Entries
2022-01-10
Petition DENIED.
2021-12-16
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/7/2022.
2021-12-10
Reply of petitioner Keyaira Porter filed.
2021-12-01
Brief of respondent Arizona in opposition filed.
2021-11-01
Response Requested. (Due December 1, 2021)
2021-10-28
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/12/2021.
2021-10-20
Waiver of right of respondent State of Arizona to respond filed.
2021-10-15
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due November 18, 2021)
Attorneys
Keyaira Porter
State of Arizona