22 Cal. 4th 48 - People v. Ervin’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 federal appellate · 217 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 232 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Defendant first contends the excusal procedure tended to produce .a “pro-death” jury because it allowed counsel to stipulate to excuse prospective jurors based on vague or conflicting questionnaire -responses, without conducting the usual probing voir dire needed to accurately “death qualify” a jury. According to defendant, the stipulated procedure resulted in excusing at least 150 prospective jurors whose questionnaire responses were insufficient to justify their exclusion under Wainwright v. Witt, supra, 469 U.S. at page 424 [105 S.Ct. at page 852]. Defendant also argues that the questionnaires were inadequate bases for excusing prospective jurors because of hardship, and that an examination of the individual questionnaires shows .that many of these persons were excused without meeting any of the “death views” or hardship criteria of the stipulated agreement. Further, defendant suggests the trial court “abdicated its responsibility” and violated statutory procedures (see Code Civ. Proc., §§ 223, 230) and “analogous federal, standards” by delegating, to counsel the task of screening out possibly biased or “hard-shipped” prospective jurors. Finally, defendant argues that the procedure employed for excusing prospective , jurprs .took place outside his presence, violating his statutory and constitutional right to be personally present at all “critical stages” of the proceedings unless he has executed a written waiver of that right. (See §§ 977, subd. (b), Í043; Cal. Const., art”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 7 Cal. 5th 463 - People v. Caro · Ervin v. Davis

2. “review a trial court's determination regarding the sufficiency of a prosecutor's justifications for exercising peremptory challenges with great restraint. The party seeking to justify a suspect excusal need only offer a genuine, reasonably specific, race- or groupneutral explanation related to the particular case being tried. [Citations.] The justification need not support a challenge for cause, and even a trivial reason, if genuine and neutral, will suffice. [Citations.] If the trial court makes a sincere and reasoned effort to evaluate the nondiscriminatory justifications offered, its conclusions are entitled to deference on appeal.... [Citation.] [Citations.] The determination whether substantial evidence exists to support the prosecutor's assertion of a nondiscriminatory purpose is a purely factual question. [Citation.]”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 26 Cal. 4th 81 - People v. Catlin · 90 Cal. App. 4th 413 - People v. Turner

3. “1) Lisa Kelley, age 25, was characterized as “too young.” The prosecutor believed that getting her to impose the death penalty would be an “uphill battle.” RT 9065. 2) James Thomas, age 21, was also deemed young and appeared too eager to remain on the jury, despite holding a job and attending classes. RT 9065-66. 3) Caroline Mullen was suspected of being on drugs because she appeared nervous and shook during questioning. RT 9066. Additionally, the prosecutor believed that her occupation as a juvenile counselor with a belief in rehabilitation might lead her to reject the death penalty. Id. She had “this look about her” that the prosecutor could not figure out. Id.. 4) Pamela Blake, the vice president of Richmond High School, was characterized as an arrogant woman who probably wouldn’t get along with the rest of the jury. RT '9067. She also failed to appear in court for traffic tickets, leading the prosecutor to state: “[Sjomeone who is not able to take care of traffic violations and lets them go to 408 traffic warrants shows to me she is not the type of juror I want on the jury and would be a potential hang on the death penalty.” Id. 5) Lionel Jackson concealed an arrest, had a. drug history and was “weak” on the death penalty. RT 9067. 6) Eloise Knox was described as a “biblical college student”, who the prosecutor believed would never “gas anybody.” RT 9067.She and Mother Theresa would “fit hand in hand.” Id. 7) Roslyn Roberts was not asked a single question by Petitioner’s ”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Ervin v. Davis