Third Circuit· 5/14/2004

Hardcastle v. Horn

Citations

368 F.3d 246
2004 WL 1048328

How courts have described this case

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

noting that the state is entitled to reconstruct a prosecutor’s rationale for the challenged strikes even where the prosecutor has no independent recollection of his motivation
noting “the Batson Court’s emphasis on the subjective intent of the prosecutor”
“During the course of jury selection at his trial, the prosecutor used her peremptory strikes, of which she had a total of twenty, to remove twelve of the fourteen African-American members of the venire.”
noting “we do not have authority under the federal habeas statutes … to remand a habeas corpus petition to a state court for an evidentiary hearing,” but “[f]ederal district courts, by contrast, may conduct such hearings”
Federal courts lack authority to “remand a habeas corpus petition to a state court.”
“[A] judge considering a Batson challenge is not required to comment explicitly on every piece of evidence in the record. However, some engagement with the evidence considered is necessary as part of step three of the Batson inquiry . . . .”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Scirica, Nygaard, Roth

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

31 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

27 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Hardcastle v. Horn

4 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.