griffith
kentucky
argued
october
decided
january
batson
kentucky
ruled
state
criminal
defendant
establish
prima
facie
case
racial
discrimination
violative
fourteenth
amendment
based
prosecution
use
peremptory
challenges
strike
members
defendant
race
jury
venire
defendant
made
prima
facie
showing
burden
shifted
prosecution
come
forward
neutral
explanation
challenges
cases
concern
question
whether
ruling
applies
cases
pending
direct
review
yet
final
batson
decided
petitioner
robbery
conviction
kentucky
state
affirmed
kentucky
rejected
petitioner
claim
prosecutor
use
peremptory
challenges
strike
prospective
black
jurors
deprived
petitioner
black
person
guaranteed
equal
protection
similarly
petitioner
conviction
federal
district
narcotics
charges
affirmed
appeals
rejected
petitioner
claim
prosecutor
use
peremptory
challenges
exclude
black
jurors
combined
call
jury
clerk
violated
right
petitioner
black
person
impartial
jury
petitions
certiorari
cases
filed
batson
decided
held
new
rule
conduct
criminal
prosecutions
ruling
batson
applies
retroactively
cases
state
federal
pending
direct
review
yet
final
exception
cases
new
rule
constitutes
clear
break
past
pp
failure
apply
newly
declared
constitutional
rule
criminal
cases
pending
direct
review
violates
basic
norms
constitutional
adjudication
announced
new
rule
case
selected
review
integrity
judicial
review
requires
apply
rule
similar
cases
pending
direct
review
addition
selective
application
new
rule
violates
principle
treating
similarly
situated
defendants
pp
exception
general
principle
new
rule
governing
criminal
procedure
retroactive
cases
pending
direct
review
based
solely
fact
new
rule
clear
break
past
inappropriate
principle
disregard
current
law
adjudicates
case
pending
direct
review
applies
regardless
specific
characteristics
new
rule
announced
use
clear
break
exception
creates
problem
treating
similarly
situated
defendants
fact
new
rule
may
constitute
clear
break
past
bearing
actual
inequity
results
one
many
similarly
situated
defendants
receives
benefit
new
rule
pp
blackmun
delivered
opinion
brennan
marshall
powell
stevens
scalia
joined
powell
filed
concurring
opinion
post
rehnquist
filed
dissenting
opinion
post
white
filed
dissenting
opinion
rehnquist
joined
post
together
brown
certiorari
appeals
tenth
circuit
vincent
aprile
ii
argued
cause
petitioner
brief
larry
marshall
joanne
yanish
fred
haddad
argued
cause
filed
brief
petitioner
paul
richwalsky
assistant
attorney
general
kentucky
argued
cause
respondent
brief
david
armstrong
attorney
general
david
martin
assistant
attorney
general
deputy
solicitor
general
bryson
argued
cause
brief
solicitor
general
fried
assistant
attorney
general
trott
roy
englert
fn
julius
levonne
chambers
charles
stephen
ralston
steven
winter
filed
brief
naacp
legal
defense
educational
fund
et
al
amici
curiae
urging
reversal
cases
frances
baker
jack
filed
brief
national
association
criminal
defense
lawyers
amicus
curiae
cases
briefs
amici
curiae
filed
state
north
carolina
et
al
lacy
thornburg
attorney
general
north
carolina
joan
byers
special
deputy
attorney
general
charles
graddick
attorney
general
alabama
robert
corbin
attorney
general
arizona
john
steven
clark
attorney
general
arkansas
john
kelly
chief
state
attorney
connecticut
charles
oberly
attorney
general
delaware
corinne
watanabe
attorney
general
hawaii
neil
hartigan
attorney
general
illinois
linley
pearson
attorney
general
indiana
thomas
miller
attorney
general
iowa
robert
stephan
attorney
general
kansas
william
guste
attorney
general
louisiana
stephen
sachs
attorney
general
maryland
edwin
pittman
attorney
general
mississippi
william
webster
attorney
general
missouri
michael
turpen
attorney
general
oklahoma
travis
medlock
attorney
general
south
carolina
michael
cody
attorney
general
tennessee
jim
mattox
attorney
general
texas
david
wilkinson
attorney
general
utah
mary
sue
terry
attorney
general
virginia
archie
mcclintock
attorney
general
wyoming
lawyers
committee
civil
rights
law
barry
sullivan
marshall
schmitt
harold
tyler
james
robertson
norman
redlich
william
robinson
judith
winston
national
legal
aid
defender
association
patricia
unsinn
justice
blackmun
delivered
opinion
cases
one
state
one
federal
concern
retrospective
application
batson
kentucky
batson
ruled
defendant
state
criminal
trial
establish
prima
facie
case
racial
discrimination
violative
fourteenth
amendment
based
prosecution
use
peremptory
challenges
strike
members
defendant
race
jury
venire
defendant
made
prima
facie
showing
burden
shifted
prosecution
come
forward
neutral
explanation
challenges
present
cases
consider
whether
ruling
applicable
litigation
pending
direct
state
federal
review
yet
final
batson
decided
answer
question
affirmative
petitioner
randall
lamont
griffith
black
person
indicted
circuit
jefferson
county
batson
tried
charges
robbery
theft
unlawful
taking
persistent
felony
offender
second
degree
app
first
day
trial
prosecution
defense
attorneys
conducted
voir
dire
examination
jury
venire
exercised
peremptory
challenges
prosecution
used
four
five
allotted
challenges
strike
four
five
prospective
black
jurors
defense
used
eight
allotted
nine
challenges
strike
prospective
white
jurors
two
duplicate
strikes
two
extra
jurors
remained
duplicate
strikes
one
black
person
removed
random
draw
thus
black
person
remained
jury
defense
counsel
expressed
concern
griffith
tried
jury
asked
request
prosecutor
state
reasons
exercising
peremptory
challenges
four
prospective
black
jurors
request
refused
counsel
moved
discharge
panel
alleging
prosecutor
use
peremptory
challenges
remove
one
prospective
black
jurors
constituted
violation
griffith
sixth
fourteenth
amendment
rights
denied
motion
jury
returned
verdict
guilty
charge
robbery
fixed
petitioner
punishment
years
imprisonment
jury
found
petitioner
guilty
persistent
felony
offender
pursuant
rev
stat
enhanced
sentence
years
imprisonment
kentucky
unpublished
memorandum
opinion
affirmed
judgment
conviction
app
rejected
petitioner
claim
prosecutor
use
peremptory
challenges
deprived
guaranteed
equal
protection
relied
swain
alabama
ruled
black
defendant
establish
violation
equal
protection
clause
solely
proof
prosecutor
use
peremptory
challenges
strike
black
jurors
defendant
trial
noted
however
inference
purposeful
discrimination
raised
prosecutor
engaged
pattern
challenging
black
jurors
series
cases
see
kentucky
concluded
swain
disposed
petitioner
claim
decline
go
swain
app
griffith
timely
filed
petition
writ
certiorari
petition
pending
decided
batson
kentucky
supra
rejected
portion
reasoning
swain
alabama
kentucky
relied
two
months
later
allen
hardy
per
curiam
held
ruling
batson
applied
retroactively
case
federal
habeas
review
granted
certiorari
griffith
case
limited
question
whether
ruling
batson
applies
retroactively
state
conviction
pending
direct
review
time
batson
decision
petitioner
willie
davis
brown
black
person
convicted
jury
district
western
district
oklahoma
narcotics
charges
jury
selection
two
venire
panels
assembled
record
six
prospective
black
jurors
total
venire
four
excused
cause
two
excused
prosecutor
use
peremptory
challenges
defense
counsel
objected
prosecutor
use
peremptory
challenges
strike
black
persons
jury
claiming
petitioner
thereby
denied
jury
representative
community
action
taken
response
objection
prospective
jurors
assembled
second
venire
panel
prosecutor
called
jury
clerk
inquire
racial
composition
additional
venire
hearing
held
later
jury
deliberating
evidence
prosecutor
said
clerk
like
black
jurors
possible
app
clerk
testified
however
remembered
prosecutor
comment
get
blacks
jury
clerk
went
say
alter
jury
selection
way
response
prosecutor
comment
district
concluded
prosecutor
contact
jury
clerk
looked
dealt
someone
inasmuch
fell
category
possible
prosecutorial
misconduct
affect
integrity
selection
jury
therefore
concluded
new
trial
necessary
jury
convicted
petitioner
appeals
tenth
circuit
affirmed
judgment
conviction
rejected
brown
claim
prosecutor
use
peremptory
challenges
exclude
prospective
black
jurors
combined
call
jury
clerk
violated
petitioner
right
impartial
jury
concluded
brown
met
swain
threshold
requirement
petitioner
must
show
systematic
intentional
course
conduct
prosecutor
calculated
exclude
black
jurors
case
case
concluded
communication
prosecutor
jury
clerk
suggest
pattern
systematic
exclusion
black
jurors
although
observed
prosecutor
action
improper
must
condemned
concluded
district
prosecutor
request
effect
selection
brown
jury
prior
batson
decision
petitioner
timely
filed
petition
writ
certiorari
granted
certiorari
limited
question
whether
ruling
batson
applies
retroactively
federal
conviction
pending
direct
review
case
set
argument
tandem
griffith
case
ii
years
ago
adopted
analysis
claims
retroactivity
new
constitutional
rules
criminal
procedure
see
linkletter
walker
linkletter
held
mapp
ohio
extended
fourth
amendment
exclusionary
rule
applied
retroactively
state
conviction
become
final
mapp
decided
explained
constitution
neither
prohibits
requires
retrospective
effect
new
constitutional
rule
determination
retroactivity
must
depend
weigh
ing
merits
demerits
case
decision
apply
mapp
retroactively
based
purpose
mapp
rule
reliance
placed
upon
previous
doctrine
effect
administration
justice
retrospective
application
mapp
see
also
stovall
denno
retroactivity
depends
purpose
served
new
standards
extent
reliance
law
enforcement
authorities
old
standards
effect
administration
justice
retroactive
application
new
standards
shortly
decision
linkletter
held
analysis
applied
convictions
final
convictions
pending
direct
review
see
johnson
new
jersey
stovall
denno
latter
case
concluded
purposes
applying
three
factors
analysis
distinction
justified
convictions
final
convictions
various
stages
trial
direct
review
ibid
thus
number
new
rules
criminal
procedure
held
apply
retroactively
either
final
cases
cases
pending
direct
review
see
stovall
denno
supra
destefano
woods
desist
daniel
louisiana
per
curiam
johnson
however
shifted
course
case
reviewed
length
history
decisions
area
retroactivity
concluded
words
justice
harlan
etroactivity
must
rethought
quoting
desist
dissenting
opinion
specifically
concluded
retroactivity
analysis
convictions
become
final
must
different
analysis
convictions
final
time
new
decision
issued
observed
number
separate
opinions
since
linkletter
various
members
asserted
minimum
defendants
whose
cases
still
pending
direct
appeal
time
decision
entitled
invoke
new
rule
collecting
opinions
rationale
distinguishing
cases
become
final
applying
new
rules
retroactively
cases
latter
category
explained
length
justice
harlan
desist
dissenting
opinion
mackey
opinion
concurring
judgment
johnson
embraced
significant
extent
comprehensive
analysis
presented
justice
harlan
opinions
justice
harlan
view
failure
apply
newly
declared
constitutional
rule
criminal
cases
pending
direct
review
violates
basic
norms
constitutional
adjudication
first
settled
principle
adjudicates
cases
controversies
see
art
iii
unlike
legislature
promulgate
new
rules
constitutional
criminal
procedure
broad
basis
rather
nature
judicial
review
requires
adjudicate
specific
cases
case
usually
becomes
vehicle
announcement
new
rule
decided
new
rule
case
selected
integrity
judicial
review
requires
apply
rule
similar
cases
pending
direct
review
justice
harlan
observed
resolve
cases
us
direct
review
light
best
understanding
governing
constitutional
principles
difficult
see
adjudicate
case
truth
assertion
power
disregard
current
law
adjudicating
cases
us
already
run
full
course
appellate
review
quite
simply
assertion
constitutional
function
one
adjudication
effect
legislation
mackey
opinion
concurring
judgment
second
selective
application
new
rules
violates
principle
treating
similarly
situated
defendants
see
desist
harlan
dissenting
pointed
johnson
problem
applying
new
rules
cases
pending
direct
review
actual
inequity
results
chooses
many
similarly
situated
defendants
chance
beneficiary
new
rule
emphasis
original
although
tolerated
inequity
time
applying
new
rules
retroactively
cases
direct
review
noted
time
toleration
come
end
ibid
johnson
acceptance
justice
harlan
views
led
holding
subject
certain
exceptions
decision
construing
fourth
amendment
applied
retroactively
convictions
yet
final
time
decision
rendered
exceptions
referred
related
three
categories
concluded
existing
precedent
established
threshold
tests
retroactivity
analysis
two
categories
new
rule
already
retroactively
applied
decision
nothing
apply
settled
precedent
different
factual
situations
see
new
ruling
trial
lacked
authority
convict
criminal
defendant
first
place
see
third
category
new
rule
clear
break
past
precedent
one
issue
cases
described
johnson
expressly
declared
rule
criminal
procedure
clear
break
past
desist
almost
invariably
gone
find
newly
minted
principle
nonretroactive
see
peltier
brennan
dissenting
collecting
cases
type
case
traits
particular
constitutional
rule
less
critical
express
threshold
determination
new
constitutional
interpretatio
change
law
prospectivity
arguably
proper
course
williams
plurality
opinion
found
new
rule
unanticipated
second
third
stovall
factors
reliance
law
enforcement
authorities
old
standards
effect
administration
justice
retroactive
application
new
rule
virtually
compelled
finding
nonretroactivity
see
gosa
mayden
plurality
opinion
michigan
payne
shea
louisiana
applied
johnson
held
fifth
amendment
rule
announced
edwards
arizona
prohibited
use
suspect
requested
counsel
confession
obtained
interrogation
without
suspect
attorney
present
retroactive
cases
direct
review
edwards
decided
using
johnson
rationale
concluded
nothing
fourth
amendment
rule
suggested
given
greater
retroactive
effect
fifth
amendment
rule
addition
johnson
concluded
new
rule
fall
within
clear
break
exception
previous
term
solem
stumes
explicitly
recognized
edwards
sort
clear
break
case
almost
automatically
nonretroactive
although
shea
expressed
doubt
merits
different
retroactivity
rule
cases
new
rule
clear
break
past
explained
need
concerned
question
iii
question
whether
different
retroactivity
rule
apply
new
rule
clear
break
past
however
squarely
us
present
cases
allen
hardy
case
federal
habeas
said
rule
batson
explicit
substantial
break
prior
precedent
overruled
portion
swain
therefore
reexamine
rationale
maintaining
clear
break
exception
general
proposition
new
rules
governing
criminal
procedure
retroactive
cases
pending
direct
review
reasons
persuaded
us
johnson
adopt
different
conclusions
convictions
direct
review
already
become
final
conclude
engrafted
exception
based
solely
upon
particular
characteristics
new
rule
adopted
inappropriate
first
principle
disregard
current
law
adjudicates
case
pending
direct
review
applies
regardless
specific
characteristics
particular
new
rule
announced
recognized
johnson
fact
new
rule
clear
break
past
relevant
primarily
implicates
second
third
stovall
factors
reliance
law
enforcement
officials
burden
administration
justice
imposed
retroactive
application
even
factors
may
useful
deciding
whether
convictions
already
become
final
receive
benefit
new
rule
clear
break
exception
derived
stovall
factors
reintroduces
precisely
type
analysis
justice
harlan
rejected
inappropriate
cases
pending
direct
review
second
use
clear
break
exception
creates
problem
treating
similarly
situated
defendants
james
kirkland
batson
petitioner
batson
kentucky
randall
lamont
griffith
petitioner
present
kentucky
case
tried
jefferson
circuit
approximately
three
months
apart
prosecutor
exercised
peremptory
challenges
trials
solely
fortuities
judicial
process
determined
case
chose
initially
hear
plenary
review
justice
powell
pointed
hardly
comports
ideal
administration
justice
even
hand
one
chance
beneficiary
lucky
individual
whose
case
chosen
occasion
announcing
new
principle
enjoys
retroactive
application
others
similarly
situated
claims
adjudicated
old
doctrine
hankerson
north
carolina
opinion
concurring
judgment
quoting
desist
douglas
dissenting
see
also
michigan
payne
marshall
dissenting
different
treatment
two
cases
justified
constitution
cases
differ
respect
relevant
different
treatment
fact
new
rule
may
constitute
clear
break
past
bearing
actual
inequity
results
one
many
similarly
situated
defendants
receives
benefit
new
rule
johnson
emphasis
omitted
therefore
hold
new
rule
conduct
criminal
prosecutions
applied
retroactively
cases
state
federal
pending
direct
review
yet
final
exception
cases
new
rule
constitutes
clear
break
past
accordingly
judgment
kentucky
reversed
case
remanded
proceedings
inconsistent
opinion
judgment
appeals
tenth
circuit
reversed
case
remanded
proceedings
consistent
opinion
ordered
footnotes
number
prospective
jurors
remaining
list
peremptory
challenges
exceeds
number
jurors
seated
cards
bearing
numbers
identifying
prospective
jurors
placed
box
clerk
draws
random
number
cards
necessary
reduce
jury
number
required
law
ibid
submitting
case
jury
trial
granted
griffith
request
directed
verdict
acquittal
charge
theft
unlawful
taking
see
tr
number
prospective
jurors
first
venire
excused
cause
resulted
remaining
number
insufficient
constitute
full
petit
jury
record
confusion
number
prospective
black
jurors
total
venire
according
statement
record
six
two
panels
oral
argument
counsel
petitioner
brown
stated
five
called
tr
oral
arg
appears
agreement
however
two
black
jurors
excused
prosecutor
use
peremptory
challenges
see
ibid
record
app
final
mean
case
judgment
conviction
rendered
availability
appeal
exhausted
time
petition
certiorari
elapsed
petition
certiorari
finally
denied
see
johnson
citing
linkletter
walker
johnson
held
fourth
amendment
ruling
announced
payton
new
york
prohibiting
police
making
warrantless
nonconsensual
entry
suspect
home
purpose
making
routine
felony
arrest
applied
retroactively
case
pending
direct
appeal
noted
johnson
review
address
area
civil
retroactivity
see
area
continues
governed
standard
announced
chevron
oil
huson
see
among
others
brown
louisiana
powell
stevens
joined
concurring
judgment
harlin
missouri
powell
concurring
judgment
hankerson
north
carolina
marshall
concurring
judgment
powell
concurring
judgment
two
categories
new
rules
automatically
applied
retroactively
affected
way
decision
today
solem
stumes
concluded
rule
announced
edwards
retroactive
conviction
become
final
petitioner
griffith
argues
batson
ruling
clear
break
past
announce
new
principle
constitutional
law
equal
protection
clause
whatever
merits
argument
might
foreclosed
allen
hardy
batson
tried
february
see
app
batson
kentucky
petitioner
griffith
tried
may
year
app
may
worth
petitioner
brown
tried
oklahoma
june
app
justice
powell
concurring
join
opinion
consider
important
step
toward
ending
confusion
resulted
applying
linkletter
walker
basis
concluded
well
advised
adopt
justice
harlan
view
retroactive
application
decisions
respect
cases
pending
time
direct
appeal
respect
cases
pending
habeas
corpus
petitions
see
hankerson
north
carolina
concurring
judgment
harlan
view
stated
mackey
opinion
concurring
judgment
mackey
dissenting
judgment
williams
desist
dissenting
opinion
persuaded
justice
harlan
reasoning
followed
since
see
hankerson
north
carolina
supra
harlin
missouri
concurring
judgment
brown
louisiana
concurring
judgment
solem
stumes
concurring
judgment
cases
decide
today
involve
retroactivity
decisions
pending
direct
review
necessary
express
opinion
respect
habeas
corpus
petitions
read
opinion
question
carefully
left
open
squarely
presented
hoped
adopt
harlan
view
retroactivity
cases
seeking
relief
habeas
petitions
see
mackey
supra
view
habeas
petitions
generally
judged
according
constitutional
standards
existing
time
conviction
chief
justice
rehnquist
dissenting
stated
dissenting
opinion
shea
louisiana
willing
adopt
aspects
approach
retroactivity
propounded
justice
harlan
opinion
mackey
justice
harlan
view
new
constitutional
rules
governing
criminal
prosecutions
apply
retroactively
cases
pending
direct
appeal
rule
announced
narrow
exceptions
apply
collateral
proceedings
challenging
convictions
become
final
rule
announced
majority
today
adopts
portion
approach
therefore
join
justice
white
dissent
agreeing
present
state
retroactivity
jurisprudence
majority
erred
rejecting
reasons
cited
allen
hardy
making
batson
kentucky
nonretroactive
justice
white
chief
justice
justice
join
dissenting
last
term
decided
rule
announced
batson
kentucky
apply
collateral
review
convictions
became
final
decision
batson
announced
allen
hardy
reaching
judgment
weighed
three
factors
traditionally
considered
deciding
retroactivity
new
rule
criminal
procedure
purpose
served
new
standards
extent
reliance
law
enforcement
authorities
old
standards
effect
administration
justice
retroactive
application
new
standards
quoting
solem
stumes
turn
quoting
stovall
denno
justice
suggested
test
unworkable
question
feels
constrained
fashion
different
rule
cases
direct
review
reasons
offers
new
find
unpersuasive
today
past
two
concerns
purportedly
underlie
majority
decision
first
retroactivity
somehow
essential
attribute
judicial
decisionmaking
announces
new
rule
declines
give
retroactive
effect
abandoned
judicial
role
assumed
function
legislature
use
term
justice
harlan
employed
describing
problem
desist
harlan
dissenting
second
completely
unrelated
concern
fairness
business
majority
reasons
treat
like
cases
alike
accordingly
unfair
one
litigant
receive
benefit
new
decision
another
identically
situated
denied
benefit
majority
concerns
doubt
laudable
escape
conclusion
rule
spawned
makes
sense
means
avoiding
come
known
problem
rule
announced
majority
wholly
inadequate
true
legislature
super
otherwise
think
concerns
supposed
usurpation
legislative
authority
generally
go
substance
decisions
whether
retroactive
surely
believe
overstepped
bounds
legitimate
authority
announcing
new
rule
constitutional
law
find
little
solace
decision
holding
new
rule
retroactive
decision
sense
illegitimate
making
retroactive
useless
gesture
fool
one
hand
decision
salutary
one
one
whose
purposes
retroactive
application
retroactivity
may
worse
useless
imposing
costs
criminal
justice
system
likely
uncompensated
perceptible
gains
judicial
legitimacy
claim
majority
rule
serves
interest
fairness
equally
hollow
although
majority
finds
intolerable
apply
new
rule
one
case
direct
appeal
another
perfectly
willing
tolerate
disparate
treatment
defendants
seeking
direct
review
convictions
prisoners
attacking
convictions
collateral
proceedings
stated
see
johnson
white
dissenting
williams
plurality
opinion
seems
attempt
distinguish
direct
collateral
challenges
purposes
retroactivity
misguided
majority
rule
otherwise
identically
situated
defendants
may
subject
different
constitutional
rules
depending
long
ago
conduct
occurred
quickly
cases
proceed
criminal
justice
system
disparity
different
kind
occurs
benefit
new
constitutional
rule
retroactively
afforded
defendant
whose
case
announced
others
new
approach
equalizes
nothing
except
numbers
defendants
within
disparately
treated
classes
shea
louisiana
white
dissenting
foregoing
reasons
adhere
approach
set
stovall
denno
supra
recognize
distinction
retroactivity
purposes
cases
direct
collateral
review
even
saw
merit
applying
harlan
approach
cases
direct
appeal
nonetheless
preserve
exception
clear
breaks
recognized
johnson
precedent
decision
announcing
new
standard
almost
automatically
nonretroactive
decision
explicitly
overruled
past
precedent
allen
hardy
quoting
solem
stumes
majority
johnson
explained
found
new
rule
unanticipated
second
third
stovall
factors
reliance
law
enforcement
authorities
old
standards
effect
administration
justice
retroactive
application
new
rule
virtually
compelled
finding
citations
omitted
majority
knows
penalizing
justifiable
reliance
swain
causing
substantial
disruption
administration
justice
yet
majority
acts
principled
alternative
true
far
sounder
rule
less
principled
apply
stovall
test
determine
retroactivity
direct
collateral
review
respectfully
dissent
cases
address
differential
treatment
cases
direct
collateral
review
adhere
view
decisions
johnson
shea
louisiana
provide
satisfactory
justification
distinguishing
two
classes
cases
stated
shea
majority
recognizes
distinction
direct
review
habeas
problematic
justifies
differential
treatment
appealing
need
draw
curtain
finality
unfortunate
enough
exhausted
last
direct
appeal
time
edwards
arizona
decided
yet
majority
offers
reasons
conclusion
finality
decisive
factor
conviction
overturned
direct
appeal
basis
edwards
violation
remedy
offered
defendant
new
trial
inculpatory
statements
obtained
violation
edwards
excluded
clear
majority
finds
burdensome
remedy
acceptable
imposed
state
direct
review
result
collateral
attack
disruption
attendant
upon
remedy
vary
depending
whether
imposed
direct
review
habeas
accordingly
remedy
must
granted
defendants
direct
appeal
strong
reason
deny
prisoners
attacking
convictions
collaterally
conversely
serves
worthwhile
purpose
grant
remedy
defendant
whose
conviction
final
edwards
hard
see
remedy
available
direct
review
omitted
distinction
direct
review
collateral
attack
may
bear
relationship
recency
crime
thus
extent
difficulties
presented
new
trial
may
severe
underlying
offense
remote
time
may
new
trials
tend
somewhat
burdensome
habeas
cases
cases
involving
reversals
direct
appeal
however
relationship
means
direct
speed
cases
progress
criminal
justice
system
may
vary
widely
thus
truly
concerned
treating
like
cases
alike
accomplish
purpose
far
precisely
applying
new
constitutional
rules
conduct
appropriately
recent
vintage
assume
however
one
argue
explicit
example
course
less
burdensome
aggregate
apply
batson
cases
pending
batson
decided
give
full
retroactive
effect
token
less
burdensome
apply
batson
retroactively
cases
involving
defendants
whose
last
names
begin
letter
make
decision
fully
retroactive
majority
obviously
countenance
latter
course
failure
identify
truly
relevant
distinction
cases
direct
appeal
cases
raising
collateral
challenges
makes
rule
announces
equally
indefensible
shea
louisiana
white
dissenting