BOONSONG JITNAN v. Oliver

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that prospective jurors whose views would prevent them from performing their duties as jurors should be removed for cause
• holding that prospective jurors whose views would prevent them from performing their duties as jurors should be removed for cause
• recognizing that a lack of findings supporting the district court's decision hampers meaningful appellate review, even when such review is deferential, \because [the appellate court is] left to mere speculation\
• recognizing that a lack of findings supporting the district court's decision hampers meaningful appellate review, even when such review is deferential, \because [the appellate court is] left to mere speculation\
• holding that \[d]etached language considered alone is not sufficient to establish that a juror can be fair when the juror's declaration as a whole indicates that she could not state unequivocally that a preconception would not influence her verdict.\ (emphasis added
• holding that \[d]etached language considered alone is not sufficient to establish that a juror can be fair when the juror's declaration as a whole indicates that she could not state unequivocally that a preconception would not influence her verdict.\ (emphasis added

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).