324 N.J. Super. 558 - State v. Clark’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[ 0 ]nce a [party contesting a peremptory challenge] has made a prima facie showing of discriminatory use of peremptory challenges, the trial court must make specific findings with respect to the ... proffered reasons for exercising any disputed challenges. The court must consider whether those reasons are reasonably relevant to the particular case on trial or its parties or witnesses. Moreover, it is essential that separate findings be made with respect to each disputed challenge. If the court finds that the [party exercising the peremptory challenge] has presented neutral reasons for exercising each disputed challenge, it must then determine whether the [contestant] has carried the ultimate burden of proving, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the [party exercising the peremptory challenge] exercised its peremptory challenges on constitutionally-impermissible grounds of presumed group bias. In making this determination, the court must consider whether the [the party exercising the peremptory challenge] has applied the proffered reasons for the exercise of the disputed challenges even-handedly to all prospective jurors. A nondiscriminatory reason for exercising a peremptory challenge which appears genuine and reasonable on its face may become suspect if the only prospective jurors with that characteristic who the [party exercising the peremptory challenge] has excused are members of a cognizable group. In addition, the court must consider the overall pattern of the [pa”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Osorio · 402 N.J. Super. 93 - State v. Osorio

2. “the exercise of other peremptory challenges in the case before the court is probative of that intent, regardless of when those challenges were exercised.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 356 N.J. Super. 266 - State v. Fuller

3. “the ultimate composition of the jury[] is relevant to the determination of whether the prosecutor's intent was discriminatory.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 402 N.J. Super. 93 - State v. Osorio