State v. Worsham

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that a peremptory challenge “is usually based on educated guesses about probabilities based on the limited information available to an attorney about prospective jurors”
• noting that a peremptory strike based on religious belief would be constitutional if the religious belief might interfere with a juror’s ability to follow the law
• holding District Court properly found no purposeful racial discrimination under step three of Batson upon finding the prosecution’s proffered reasons for the peremptory strike “true and sincere”
• accepting the government’s argument that the challenged venire members’ “unusual amount of religious activity suggested strong religious beliefs, which could prevent them from convicting the defendant”
• finding government’s explanation for peremptory strike of “juror’s strong religious beliefs [that] would prevent him from rendering judgment” sufficient to overcome Batson challenge

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).