Citation network
Holland Vs. Illinois
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jan 01, 1990
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
U.S. 474 (1990) U.S. Supreme Court Holland v. IllinoisSearch
-
U.S. 474 (1990) Holland v. IllinoisSearch
-
requirement be interpreted to prohibit peremptory challenges. See, e.g., Page 493 U. S. 475 Lockhart v. McCreeSearch
-
to raise a Sixth Amendment challenge to the exclusion of blacks from his jury. We hold that he does. In Batson v. KentuckySearch
-
community, whether or not the systematically excluded groups are groups to which he himself belongs. See, e.g., Duren v. MissouriSearch
-
Taylor v. LouisianaSearch
-
it has not been held to require anything beyond the inclusion of all cognizable groups in the venire, see Lockhart v. McCreeSearch
-
Taylor, supra, and the use of a jury numbering at least six persons, see Ballew v. GeorgiaSearch
-
Williams v. FloridaSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
set forth not under the Sixth Amendment, but under the Equal Protection Clause. Page 493 U. S. 479 Strauder v. WestSearch
-
Amendment applies to both of them. Page 493 U. S. 480 Our relatively recent cases, beginning with Taylor v. LouisianaSearch
-
which is precisely how the traditional peremptory challenge system operates. As we described that system in Swain v. AlabamaSearch
-
was recognized in an opinion by Justice Story to be part of the common law of the United States, See United States v. MarchantSearch
-
One could plausibly Page 493 U. S. 482 argue (though we have said the contrary, see Stilson v. UnitedSearch
-
U.S. at 419 U. S. 538 . Accord, Duren v. MissouriSearch
-
application of their analysis to the petit jury. See supra at 493 U. S. 482 -483. Last Term, in Teague v. LaneSearch
-
unquestionably extended to defense and prosecution alike. The Supreme Court decision cited in text, United States v. MarchantSearch
-
id. at 25 U. S. 484 (emphasis added). Justice STEVENS relies upon a later case, United States v. ShacklefordSearch
-
of race, whether or not by use of a peremptory challenge, is a violation of the juror's constitutional rights. Batson v. KentuckySearch
-
jurors subjected to peremptory racial exclusion have the legal right to bring suit on their own behalf, Carter v. JurySearch
-
rights. We have noted that a substantial relation may entitle one party to raise the rights of another. See Singleton v. WulffSearch
-
argument that a white defendant has standing to raise an equal protection challenge, based on our decision in Batson v. KentuckySearch
-
Id. at 476 U. S. 84 (quoting Swain v. AlabamaSearch
-
U.S. at 476 U. S. 85 -86 (citing Martin v. TexasSearch
-
for and be excluded from jury service on account of his race, 476 U.S. at 476 U. S. 87 (citing Strauder v. WestSearch
-
Virginia, 100 U. S. 303 , 100 U. S. 308 (1880), Carter v. JurySearch
-
Comm'n of Greene County, 396 U. S. 320 , 396 U. S. 329 -330 (1970), and Neal v. DelawareSearch
-
U.S. at 476 U. S. 87 (citing Strauder, supra, at 100 U. S. 308 , Ballard v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 329 U. S. 187 , 329 U. S. 195 (1946), and McCray v. NewSearch
-
in the constitutional sense. See, e.g., Ballew v. GeorgiaSearch
-
in the eyes of the Constitution unless it is drawn from a fair-cross-section of the community. Thus, in Taylor v. LouisianaSearch
-
the jury trial contemplates a jury drawn from a fair-cross-section of the community. A unanimous Court stated in Smith v. TexasSearch
-
That the two protections are distinct is shown as well by Duren v. MissouriSearch
-
U. S. 370 -371, and n. (opinion of REHNQUIST, J.). Page 493 U. S. 495 More recently, in Lockhart v. McCreeSearch
-
whether the exclusion is accomplished in the selection of the venire or by peremptory challenge is immaterial. Batson v. KentuckySearch
-
U.S. at 476 U. S. 173 -174 (citing Batson v. KentuckySearch
-
this Court has repeatedly recognized that a State need not permit peremptory challenges. See, e.g., Stilson v. UnitedSearch
-
at 493 U. S. 517 -518, and n. 15. In support of the second step in its analysis, the majority quotes Swain v. AlabamaSearch
-
exclusion of black jurors violated the Equal Protection Clause. The same situation was presented in Batson v. KentuckySearch
-
State has violated the fair-cross-section principle of the Sixth Amendment. II Fifteen years ago, in Taylor v. LouisianaSearch
-
on the Sixth Amendment was novel, the constitutional principle that it vindicated was ancient. Long before Duncan v. LouisianaSearch
-
Smith v. TexasSearch
-
Carter v. JurySearch
-
Ex parte Virginia, 100 U. S. 339 , 100 U. S. 345 (1880) (citing Strauder v. WestSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial