California Supreme Court· 9/5/1989

People v. Bell

Citations

778 P.2d 129
49 Cal. 3d 502
262 Cal. Rptr. 1
1989 Cal. LEXIS 1602

How courts have described this case

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

observing that \it is one thing to say that a probability calculation is useful evidence; it is quite another to say that it embodies a constitutional standard\
“A criminal defendant who asserts a systematic exclusion of a cognizable class of prospective jurors in a pretrial challenge to the jury venire or panel need not show that his trial jury was underrepresentative.”
\A criminal defendant who asserts a systematic exclusion of a cognizable class of prospective jurors in a pretrial challenge to the jury venire or panel need not show that his trial jury was underrepresentative.\
“A criminal defendant who asserts a systematic exclusion of a cognizable class of prospective jurors in a pretrial challenge to the jury venire or panel need not show that his trial jury was underrepresentative.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Eagleson, Kaufman, Arguelles, Mosk, Broussard

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

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

Other cases named People v. Bell

433 other CourtListener records share this case name; the 50 most cited are listed.

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.