Rodney E. Thomas v. Robert G. Borg Attorney General, California

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that petitioner's observations that there were no black 24 jurors on the panel from which his jury was chosen did not satisfy second Duren prong, 25 because his panel represented only a small portion of venires
• rejecting an ineffective assistance claim relating to jury 17 composition by applying the Strickland prejudice standard
• denying cross-section claim where, because of counsel’s failure to preserve relevant statistics at the time of trial, petitioner unable to provide sufficient statistical evidence to support claim
• disfavoring the comparative-disparity test because “it exaggerates the effect of any deviation”
• \[T]he comparative disparity test is strongly disfavored in the Ninth Circuit on the ground that it exaggerates the effect of any deviation.\
• “[T]he second prong of the Duren test requires proof, typically statistical data, that the jury pool does not adequately represent the distinctive group in relation to the number of such persons in the community.” (quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).