Ham v. South Carolina

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that voir dire on race was constitutionally required where defendant, a civil rights activist, claimed that he had been framed because of his race
• concluding that the defendant’s right to due process was violated by the state court’s refusal to permit questioning about racial bias
• concluding that voir dire on racial prejudice was constitutionally required when a black civil rights activist believed he was being framed by law enforcement
• holding that inquiry into jurors' attitudes towards race was constitutionally mandated when the accused claimed that he was framed in retaliation for his civil rights activities
• recognizing “the traditionally broad discretion accorded to the trial judge in conducting voir dire . . .”
• recognizing \the traditionally broad discretion accorded to the trial judge in conducting voir dire . . .\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Other cases named Ham v. South Carolina

3 other CourtListener records share this case name.

• Ham v. South Carolina
  Supreme Court· 1978-01-09· cited 1×
• Ham v. South Carolina
  Supreme Court· 1972-01-24
• Ham v. South Carolina
  Supreme Court· 1972-11-06