cockrell
director
texas
department
criminal
justice
institutional
division
argued
october
decided
february
dallas
county
prosecutors
used
peremptory
strikes
exclude
eligible
serve
jury
petitioner
capital
murder
trial
moved
strike
jury
ground
exclusions
violated
equal
protection
petitioner
presented
extensive
evidence
supporting
motion
pretrial
hearing
trial
judge
denied
relief
finding
evidence
indicating
systematic
exclusion
blacks
required
precedent
swain
alabama
subsequently
jury
found
petitioner
guilty
sentenced
death
appeal
pending
established
batson
kentucky
process
evaluating
equal
protection
claims
petitioner
upon
remand
texas
criminal
appeals
new
findings
light
batson
original
trial
held
hearing
admitted
swain
hearing
evidence
took
evidence
concluded
petitioner
failed
satisfy
step
one
batson
evidence
even
raise
inference
racial
motivation
state
use
peremptory
challenges
also
determined
state
prevailed
steps
two
three
prosecutors
proffered
credible
explanations
excluded
reluctance
assess
reservations
concerning
imposition
death
penalty
petitioner
prove
purposeful
discrimination
petitioner
direct
appeal
state
habeas
petitions
denied
filed
federal
habeas
petition
raising
batson
claim
issues
federal
district
denied
relief
deference
state
courts
acceptance
prosecutors
justifications
striking
potential
jurors
subsequently
denied
petitioner
application
certificate
appealability
coa
fifth
circuit
noted
coa
issue
applicant
made
substantial
showing
denial
constitutional
right
reasoned
petitioner
must
make
substantial
showing
standard
set
forth
slack
mcdaniel
declared
required
presume
findings
correct
unless
determined
findings
result
decision
unreasonable
light
clear
convincing
evidence
applied
framework
deny
petitioner
coa
petitioner
extensive
evidence
concerning
jury
selection
procedures
falls
two
broad
categories
first
presented
pretrial
swain
hearing
testimony
evidence
relating
pattern
practice
race
discrimination
voir
dire
dallas
county
district
attorney
office
including
policy
office
exclude
minorities
jury
service
available
least
one
petitioner
prosecutors
second
two
years
later
petitioner
presented
state
trial
evidence
directly
related
prosecutors
conduct
case
including
comparative
analysis
venire
members
demonstrating
excluded
petitioner
jury
ratio
significantly
higher
caucasians
evidence
voir
dire
prosecution
questioned
venire
members
racially
disparate
fashion
death
penalty
views
willingness
serve
capital
case
willingness
impose
minimum
sentence
murder
responses
disclosing
reluctance
hesitation
impose
capital
punishment
minimum
sentence
cited
justification
striking
potential
jurors
prosecution
use
texas
criminal
procedure
practice
known
jury
shuffling
assure
white
venire
members
selected
preference
held
fifth
circuit
issued
coa
review
district
denial
habeas
relief
petitioner
pp
prisoner
seeking
postconviction
relief
may
appeal
district
denial
dismissal
petition
must
first
seek
obtain
coa
circuit
justice
judge
jurisdictional
prerequisite
coa
issue
requirements
satisfied
habeas
applicant
seeks
coa
appeals
limit
examination
threshold
inquiry
underlying
merit
claims
slack
inquiry
require
full
consideration
factual
legal
bases
supporting
claims
consistent
precedent
statutory
text
prisoner
need
demonstrate
substantial
showing
denial
constitutional
right
satisfies
standard
demonstrating
jurists
reason
disagree
district
resolution
case
issues
presented
adequate
deserve
encouragement
proceed
need
convince
judge
matter
three
judges
prevail
must
demonstrate
reasonable
jurists
find
district
assessment
constitutional
claims
debatable
wrong
ibid
pp
since
petitioner
claim
rests
batson
violation
resolution
coa
application
requires
preliminary
though
definitive
consideration
batson
framework
state
concedes
petitioner
satisfied
step
one
petitioner
acknowledges
state
proceeded
step
two
proffering
facially
explanations
strikes
critical
question
determining
whether
prisoner
proved
purposeful
discrimination
step
three
persuasiveness
prosecutor
justification
peremptory
strike
purkett
elem
per
curiam
issue
comes
whether
trial
finds
prosecutor
explanations
credible
credibility
measured
among
factors
prosecutor
demeanor
reasonable
improbable
explanations
whether
proffered
rationale
basis
accepted
trial
strategy
plurality
concluded
direct
review
context
state
finding
absence
discriminatory
intent
pure
issue
fact
accorded
significant
deference
overturned
unless
clearly
erroneous
hernandez
new
york
applies
habeas
jurisprudence
embodies
deference
factual
determinations
state
courts
presumed
correct
absent
clear
convincing
evidence
contrary
decision
adjudicated
merits
state
based
factual
determination
overturned
factual
grounds
unless
objectively
unreasonable
light
evidence
presented
proceeding
even
context
federal
habeas
deference
imply
abandonment
abdication
judicial
review
context
threshold
examination
batson
claim
suffice
support
issuance
coa
adduce
evidence
demonstrating
despite
neutral
explanation
prosecution
peremptory
strikes
final
analysis
race
based
cf
reeves
sanderson
plumbing
products
pp
review
record
stage
concludes
district
give
full
consideration
substantial
evidence
petitioner
put
forth
support
prima
facie
case
instead
accepted
without
question
state
evaluation
demeanor
prosecutors
jurors
petitioner
trial
fifth
circuit
evaluated
petitioner
coa
application
way
ruling
petitioner
claim
lacked
sufficient
merit
justify
appellate
proceedings
recited
requirements
granting
writ
interpreted
requiring
petitioner
prove
decision
objectively
unreasonable
clear
convincing
evidence
demanding
standard
incorrectly
merged
clear
convincing
evidence
standard
pertains
determinations
factual
issues
rather
decisions
unreasonableness
requirement
relates
decision
applies
granting
habeas
relief
fundamentally
incorrect
inquiring
whether
substantial
showing
denial
constitutional
right
proved
requires
question
debatability
underlying
constitutional
claim
resolution
debate
case
debate
whether
prosecution
acted
reason
striking
prospective
jurors
raised
statistical
evidence
demonstrating
eligible
excluded
petitioner
venire
fact
state
trial
occasion
judge
credibility
prosecutors
contemporaneous
justifications
time
pretrial
hearing
equal
protection
jurisprudence
dictated
swain
require
fact
three
state
proffered
rationales
striking
african
americans
ambivalence
death
penalty
hesitancy
vote
execute
defendants
capable
rehabilitated
jurors
family
history
criminality
pertained
well
white
jurors
challenged
serve
jury
evidence
state
use
racially
disparate
questioning
state
courts
failure
consider
evidence
prosecution
use
jury
shuffle
historical
evidence
racial
discrimination
dallas
county
district
attorney
office
pp
reversed
remanded
kennedy
delivered
opinion
rehnquist
stevens
scalia
souter
ginsburg
breyer
joined
scalia
filed
concurring
opinion
thomas
filed
dissenting
opinion
thomas
joe
petitioner
janie
cockrell
director
texas
department
criminal
justice
institutional
division
writ
certiorari
appeals
fifth
circuit
february
justice
kennedy
delivered
opinion
case
examine
state
prisoner
appeal
denial
dismissal
petition
writ
habeas
corpus
two
dallas
county
assistant
district
attorneys
used
peremptory
strikes
exclude
eligible
serve
jury
tried
petitioner
thomas
joe
ensuing
years
petitioner
unsuccessful
establishing
either
state
federal
conviction
death
sentence
must
vacated
jury
selection
procedures
violated
equal
protection
clause
holding
batson
kentucky
claim
arises
federal
petition
writ
habeas
corpus
procedures
standards
applicable
case
controlled
habeas
corpus
statute
codified
title
chapter
code
recently
amended
substantial
manner
antiterrorism
effective
death
penalty
act
aedpa
interest
finality
aedpa
constrains
federal
power
disturb
convictions
district
northern
district
texas
reviewing
evidence
state
trial
determined
petitioner
failed
establish
constitutional
violation
warranting
habeas
relief
appeals
fifth
circuit
concluding
insufficient
merit
case
denied
certificate
appealability
coa
district
determination
coa
denial
subject
decision
issue
standards
aedpa
imposes
appeals
may
issue
coa
review
denial
habeas
relief
district
congress
mandates
prisoner
seeking
postconviction
relief
automatic
right
appeal
district
denial
dismissal
petition
instead
petitioner
must
first
seek
obtain
coa
resolving
case
decide
habeas
applicant
seeks
permission
initiate
appellate
review
dismissal
petition
appeals
limit
examination
threshold
inquiry
underlying
merit
claims
slack
mcdaniel
consistent
prior
precedent
text
habeas
corpus
statute
reiterate
prisoner
seeking
coa
need
demonstrate
substantial
showing
denial
constitutional
right
petitioner
satisfies
standard
demonstrating
jurists
reason
disagree
district
resolution
constitutional
claims
jurists
conclude
issues
presented
adequate
deserve
encouragement
proceed
slack
supra
applying
principles
petitioner
application
conclude
coa
issued
petitioner
wife
dorothy
one
kenneth
flowers
robbed
holiday
inn
dallas
texas
emptied
cash
drawers
ordered
two
employees
doug
walker
donald
hall
lie
floor
walker
hall
gagged
strips
fabric
hands
feet
bound
petitioner
asked
flowers
going
kill
walker
hall
flowers
hesitated
refused
petitioner
shot
walker
twice
back
shot
hall
side
walker
died
wounds
state
indicted
petitioner
capital
murder
pleaded
guilty
jury
selection
took
place
five
weeks
february
march
voir
dire
concluded
petitioner
moved
strike
jury
grounds
prosecution
violated
equal
protection
clause
fourteenth
amendment
excluding
use
peremptory
challenges
petitioner
trial
occurred
decision
batson
supra
swain
alabama
controlling
precedent
swain
required
petitioner
sought
show
prosecution
conduct
part
larger
pattern
discrimination
aimed
excluding
jury
service
pretrial
hearing
held
march
petitioner
presented
extensive
evidence
support
motion
trial
judge
however
found
evidence
indicated
systematic
exclusion
blacks
matter
policy
district
attorney
office
may
done
individual
prosecutors
individual
cases
app
state
denied
petitioner
motion
strike
jury
ibid
twelve
days
later
jury
found
petitioner
guilty
trial
sentenced
death
petitioner
appealed
texas
criminal
appeals
appeal
pending
april
decided
batson
kentucky
established
process
evaluating
claims
prosecutor
used
peremptory
challenges
violation
equal
protection
clause
first
defendant
must
make
prima
facie
showing
peremptory
challenge
exercised
basis
race
second
showing
made
prosecution
must
offer
basis
striking
juror
question
third
light
parties
submissions
trial
must
determine
whether
defendant
shown
purposeful
discrimination
acknowledging
petitioner
established
inference
purposeful
discrimination
texas
criminal
appeals
remanded
case
new
findings
light
batson
state
hearing
held
may
little
two
years
petitioner
jury
empaneled
original
trial
admitted
evidence
presented
swain
hearing
evidence
testimony
attorneys
original
trial
app
january
trial
concluded
petitioner
evidence
failed
satisfy
step
one
batson
even
raise
inference
racial
motivation
use
state
peremptory
challenges
support
prima
facie
case
notwithstanding
conclusion
state
determined
state
prevailed
steps
two
three
prosecutors
offered
credible
explanations
excluded
found
disparate
prosecutorial
examination
venireman
question
primary
reasons
exercise
challenges
veniremen
question
reluctance
assess
reservations
concerning
imposition
death
penalty
discussion
petitioner
evidence
texas
criminal
appeals
denied
petitioner
appeal
denied
certiorari
texas
petitioner
state
habeas
proceedings
fared
better
denied
relief
texas
criminal
appeals
petitioner
filed
petition
writ
habeas
corpus
federal
district
pursuant
although
petitioner
raised
four
issues
concern
petitioner
jury
selection
claim
premised
batson
federal
magistrate
judge
considered
merits
troubled
evidence
adduced
proceedings
nevertheless
recommended
deference
state
courts
acceptance
prosecutors
justifications
striking
potential
jurors
petitioner
denied
relief
district
adopted
recommendation
pursuant
petitioner
sought
coa
district
application
denied
petitioner
renewed
request
appeals
fifth
circuit
also
denied
coa
appeals
noted
controlling
habeas
principles
coa
issue
applicant
made
substantial
showing
denial
constitutional
right
johnson
quoting
citing
decision
slack
mcdaniel
reasoned
petitioner
makes
showing
demonstrates
petition
involves
issues
debatable
among
jurists
reason
another
resolve
issues
differently
issues
adequate
deserve
encouragement
proceed
appeals
also
interjected
requirements
coa
determination
appellate
reviewing
federal
habeas
petition
required
presume
state
findings
correct
unless
determine
findings
result
decision
unreasonable
light
evidence
presented
unreasonableness
must
established
clear
convincing
evidence
see
applying
framework
petitioner
coa
application
appeals
concluded
state
findings
unreasonable
failed
present
clear
convincing
evidence
contrary
consequence
determined
state
adjudication
neither
resulted
decision
unreasonable
light
evidence
presented
resulted
decision
contrary
clearly
established
federal
law
determined
ibid
denied
petitioner
request
coa
granted
certiorari
coa
ruling
occasion
ruling
merit
petitioner
claim
determination
reverse
appeals
counsels
us
explain
detail
extensive
evidence
concerning
jury
selection
procedures
petitioner
evidence
falls
two
broad
categories
first
presented
state
trial
pretrial
swain
hearing
evidence
relating
pattern
practice
race
discrimination
voir
dire
second
two
years
later
presented
state
evidence
directly
related
conduct
prosecutors
case
discuss
latter
first
comparative
analysis
venire
members
demonstrates
excluded
petitioner
jury
ratio
significantly
higher
caucasians
possible
jurors
reviewed
prosecution
defense
nine
excused
cause
agreement
parties
jurors
remaining
however
excluded
peremptory
strikes
exercised
prosecutors
basis
eligible
black
jurors
removed
peremptory
strikes
contrast
prosecutors
used
peremptory
strikes
eligible
nonblack
prospective
jurors
qualified
serve
petitioner
jury
numbers
relevant
petitioner
whole
case
voir
dire
prosecution
questioned
venire
members
views
concerning
death
penalty
willingness
serve
capital
case
responses
disclosed
reluctance
hesitation
impose
capital
punishment
cited
justification
striking
potential
juror
cause
peremptory
challenge
wainwright
witt
evidence
suggests
however
manner
members
venire
questioned
varied
race
extent
divergence
responses
attributed
racially
disparate
mode
examination
relevant
inquiry
first
given
detailed
description
mechanics
execution
texas
three
sentencing
questions
answered
yes
point
thomas
joe
taken
huntsville
texas
placed
death
row
time
taken
death
house
strapped
gurney
iv
put
arm
injected
substance
cause
death
result
verdict
case
three
questions
answered
yes
app
venire
members
asked
whether
render
decision
leading
sentence
death
prospective
white
jurors
given
preface
prior
asked
views
capital
punishment
rather
three
questioned
vague
terms
share
us
personal
feelings
words
feel
death
penalty
capital
punishment
secondly
feel
serve
type
jury
actually
render
decision
result
death
defendant
case
based
evidence
even
pronounced
difference
apparent
basis
race
manner
prosecutors
questioned
members
venire
willingness
impose
minimum
sentence
murder
texas
law
time
petitioner
trial
unwillingness
warranted
removal
cause
huffman
state
tex
crim
app
vacated
part
strategy
normally
used
defense
weed
members
venire
ironically
prosecution
employed
prosecutors
first
identified
statutory
minimum
sentence
five
years
imprisonment
white
venire
members
asked
hear
case
way
thinking
calls
warrants
justifies
five
years
give
app
contrast
prospective
jurors
informed
statutory
minimum
asked
minimum
sentence
impose
typical
questioning
seven
black
jurors
follows
prosecutor
maximum
sentence
murder
life
law
give
idea
personal
feelings
feel
minimum
sentence
offense
murder
way
set
juror
well
almost
like
premeditated
said
premeditated
statute
texas
prosecutor
talking
accident
insanity
killing
heat
passion
anything
like
talking
knowing
juror
know
said
minimum
minimum
amount
say
least
twenty
years
furthermore
petitioner
points
prosecution
use
texas
criminal
procedure
practice
known
jury
shuffling
practice
permits
parties
rearrange
order
members
venire
examined
increase
likelihood
visually
preferable
venire
members
moved
forward
empaneled
information
prospective
jurors
appearance
party
requesting
procedure
literally
shuffles
juror
cards
venire
members
reseated
new
order
tex
code
crim
proc
art
vernon
supp
shuffling
affects
jury
composition
prospective
jurors
questioned
voir
dire
dismissed
end
week
new
panel
jurors
appears
following
week
jurors
shuffled
back
panel
less
likely
questioned
serve
least
two
occasions
prosecution
requested
shuffles
predominate
number
front
panel
yet
another
occasion
prosecutors
complained
purported
inadequacy
card
shuffle
defense
lawyer
lodged
formal
objection
postshuffle
panel
composition
revealed
prospective
jurors
moved
forward
next
turn
pattern
practice
evidence
adduced
petitioner
pretrial
swain
hearing
petitioner
subpoenaed
number
current
former
dallas
county
assistant
district
attorneys
judges
others
observed
firsthand
prosecution
conduct
jury
selection
number
years
although
witnesses
denied
existence
systematic
policy
exclude
others
disagreed
dallas
county
district
judge
testified
served
district
attorney
office
superior
warned
fired
permitted
serve
jury
similarly
another
dallas
county
district
judge
former
assistant
district
attorney
testified
believed
office
systematic
policy
excluding
juries
importance
defense
presented
evidence
district
attorney
office
adopted
formal
policy
exclude
minorities
jury
service
circular
district
attorney
office
instructed
prosecutors
exercise
peremptory
strikes
minorities
take
jews
negroes
dagos
mexicans
member
minority
race
jury
matter
rich
well
educated
app
manual
entitled
jury
selection
criminal
case
distributed
prosecutors
contained
article
authored
former
prosecutor
later
judge
direction
superiors
district
attorney
office
outlining
reasoning
excluding
minorities
jury
service
although
manual
written
remained
circulation
later
available
least
one
prosecutors
trial
testimony
casts
doubt
state
claim
practices
discontinued
petitioner
trial
example
judge
testified
exclude
prosecutor
trying
cases
courtroom
discrimination
jury
selection
testimony
indicated
state
admission
requested
jury
shuffle
order
reduce
number
venire
concerns
exclusion
district
attorney
office
echoed
dallas
county
chief
public
defender
evidence
presented
petitioner
support
batson
claim
state
federal
courts
denied
relief
background
examine
whether
petitioner
case
heard
appeals
ii
mandated
federal
statute
state
prisoner
seeking
writ
habeas
corpus
absolute
entitlement
appeal
district
denial
petition
appeal
may
entertained
prisoner
denied
habeas
relief
district
must
first
seek
obtain
coa
circuit
justice
judge
jurisdictional
prerequisite
coa
statute
mandates
nless
circuit
justice
judge
issues
certificate
appealability
appeal
may
taken
appeals
result
coa
issued
federal
courts
appeals
lack
jurisdiction
rule
merits
appeals
habeas
petitioners
coa
issue
requirements
satisfied
coa
statute
establishes
procedural
rules
requires
threshold
inquiry
whether
circuit
may
entertain
appeal
slack
appeals
observed
case
permits
issuance
coa
petitioner
made
substantial
showing
denial
constitutional
right
slack
supra
recognized
congress
codified
standard
announced
barefoot
estelle
determining
constitutes
requisite
showing
controlling
standard
petitioner
must
sho
reasonable
jurists
debate
whether
matter
agree
petition
resolved
different
manner
issues
presented
deserve
encouragement
proceed
quoting
barefoot
supra
coa
determination
requires
overview
claims
habeas
petition
general
assessment
merits
look
district
application
aedpa
petitioner
constitutional
claims
ask
whether
resolution
debatable
amongst
jurists
reason
threshold
inquiry
require
full
consideration
factual
legal
bases
adduced
support
claims
fact
statute
forbids
appeals
side
steps
process
first
deciding
merits
appeal
justifying
denial
coa
based
adjudication
actual
merits
essence
deciding
appeal
without
jurisdiction
end
opinion
slack
held
coa
require
showing
appeal
succeed
accordingly
appeals
decline
application
coa
merely
believes
applicant
demonstrate
entitlement
relief
holding
slack
mean
little
appellate
review
denied
prisoner
convince
judge
matter
three
judges
prevail
consistent
coa
issue
instances
certainty
ultimate
relief
coa
sought
whole
premise
prisoner
already
failed
endeavor
barefoot
supra
holding
misconstrued
directing
coa
always
must
issue
statutes
aedpa
placed
rather
fewer
restrictions
power
federal
courts
grant
writs
habeas
corpus
state
prisoners
duncan
walker
purpose
principles
comity
finality
quoting
williams
taylor
williams
taylor
opinion
concept
threshold
gateway
test
vation
aedpa
congress
established
threshold
prerequisite
appealability
large
part
concerned
increasing
number
frivolous
habeas
corpus
petitions
challenging
capital
sentences
delayed
execution
pending
completion
appellate
process
barefoot
supra
enacting
aedpa
using
specific
standards
elaborated
earlier
threshold
test
congress
confirmed
necessity
requirement
differential
treatment
appeals
deserving
attention
plainly
follows
issuance
coa
must
pro
forma
matter
course
prisoner
seeking
coa
must
prove
absence
existence
mere
good
faith
part
barefoot
supra
require
petitioner
prove
issuance
coa
jurists
grant
petition
habeas
corpus
indeed
claim
debatable
even
though
every
jurist
reason
might
agree
coa
granted
case
received
full
consideration
petitioner
prevail
stated
slack
district
rejected
constitutional
claims
merits
showing
required
satisfy
straightforward
petitioner
must
demonstrate
reasonable
jurists
find
district
assessment
constitutional
claims
debatable
wrong
since
claim
rests
batson
violation
resolution
coa
application
requires
preliminary
though
definitive
consideration
framework
mandated
batson
reaffirmed
later
precedents
purkett
elem
per
curiam
hernandez
new
york
plurality
opinion
contrary
state
trial
ruling
remand
state
concedes
petitioner
satisfied
step
one
dispute
presented
prima
facie
claim
prosecutors
used
peremptory
challenges
exclude
venire
members
basis
race
brief
respondent
petitioner
part
acknowledges
state
proceeded
step
two
proffering
facially
explanations
strikes
batson
question
remaining
step
three
whether
carried
burden
proving
purposeful
discrimination
hernandez
supra
confirmed
purkett
elem
critical
question
determining
whether
prisoner
proved
purposeful
discrimination
step
three
persuasiveness
prosecutor
justification
peremptory
strike
stage
implausible
fantastic
justifications
may
probably
found
pretexts
purposeful
discrimination
ibid
instance
issue
comes
whether
trial
finds
prosecutor
explanations
credible
credibility
measured
among
factors
prosecutor
demeanor
reasonable
improbable
explanations
whether
proffered
rationale
basis
accepted
trial
strategy
hernandez
new
york
plurality
concluded
state
finding
absence
discriminatory
intent
pure
issue
fact
accorded
significant
deference
deference
trial
findings
issue
discriminatory
intent
makes
particular
sense
context
noted
batson
finding
turn
evaluation
credibility
citing
patton
yount
deference
necessary
reviewing
analyzes
transcripts
voir
dire
well
positioned
trial
make
credibility
determinations
appellate
accepts
trial
finding
prosecutor
explanation
peremptory
challenges
believed
fail
see
appellate
nevertheless
find
discrimination
credibility
prosecutor
explanation
goes
heart
equal
protection
analysis
settled
seems
nothing
left
review
context
direct
review
therefore
noted
trial
decision
ultimate
question
discriminatory
intent
represents
finding
fact
sort
accorded
great
deference
appeal
overturned
unless
clearly
erroneous
federal
collateral
review
decision
must
consistent
respect
due
state
courts
federal
system
applies
habeas
jurisprudence
embodies
deference
factual
determinations
state
courts
presumed
correct
absent
clear
convincing
evidence
contrary
decision
adjudicated
merits
state
based
factual
determination
overturned
factual
grounds
unless
objectively
unreasonable
light
evidence
presented
proceeding
see
also
williams
opinion
even
context
federal
habeas
deference
imply
abandonment
abdication
judicial
review
deference
definition
preclude
relief
federal
disagree
state
credibility
determination
guided
aedpa
conclude
decision
unreasonable
factual
premise
incorrect
clear
convincing
evidence
context
threshold
examination
batson
claim
issuance
coa
supported
evidence
demonstrating
despite
neutral
explanation
prosecution
peremptory
strikes
final
analysis
race
based
goes
without
saying
includes
facts
circumstances
adduced
support
prima
facie
case
cf
reeves
sanderson
plumbing
products
action
title
vii
civil
rights
act
employee
prima
facie
case
evidence
employer
response
pretext
support
finding
purposeful
discrimination
coa
granted
reviewing
determine
whether
trial
determination
prosecutor
neutrality
respect
race
objectively
unreasonable
rebutted
clear
convincing
evidence
contrary
stage
however
ask
whether
district
application
aedpa
deference
stated
petitioner
batson
claim
debatable
amongst
jurists
reason
applying
rules
application
difficulty
concluding
coa
issued
conclude
review
record
stage
district
give
full
consideration
substantial
evidence
petitioner
put
forth
support
prima
facie
case
instead
accepted
without
question
state
evaluation
demeanor
prosecutors
jurors
petitioner
trial
appeals
evaluated
application
coa
way
ruling
petitioner
claim
lacked
sufficient
merit
justify
appellate
proceedings
appeals
recited
requirements
granting
writ
interpreted
requiring
petitioner
prove
state
decision
objectively
unreasonable
clear
convincing
evidence
demanding
standard
one
level
incorrect
appeals
looking
merits
merge
independent
requirements
aedpa
require
petitioner
prove
decision
objectively
unreasonable
clear
convincing
evidence
clear
convincing
evidence
standard
found
subsection
pertains
determinations
factual
issues
rather
decisions
subsection
contains
unreasonable
requirement
applies
granting
habeas
relief
rather
granting
coa
appeals
moreover
incorrect
even
fundamental
reason
issuance
coa
appeals
jurisdiction
resolve
merits
petitioner
constitutional
claims
true
extent
merits
case
turn
agreement
disagreement
factual
finding
clear
convincing
evidence
objective
unreasonableness
standards
apply
coa
stage
however
need
make
definitive
inquiry
matter
said
coa
determination
separate
proceeding
one
distinct
underlying
merits
slack
hohn
appeals
inquired
whether
substantial
showing
denial
constitutional
right
proved
deciding
substance
appeal
threshold
inquiry
undermines
concept
coa
question
debatability
underlying
constitutional
claim
resolution
debate
case
statistical
evidence
alone
raises
debate
whether
prosecution
acted
reason
striking
prospective
jurors
prosecutors
used
peremptory
strikes
exclude
eligible
venire
members
one
served
petitioner
jury
total
prosecutors
peremptory
strikes
used
happenstance
unlikely
produce
disparity
case
debatability
weakened
examine
state
defense
disparate
treatment
appeals
held
presumption
correctness
especially
strong
trial
state
habeas
one
noted
trial
held
batson
hearing
two
years
voir
dire
prosecutors
proffered
contemporaneous
justifications
many
peremptory
strikes
state
trial
occasion
judge
credibility
explanations
time
equal
protection
jurisprudence
dictated
swain
require
result
evidence
presented
trial
batson
hearing
subject
usual
risks
imprecision
distortion
passage
time
case
three
state
proffered
rationales
striking
jurors
pertained
well
white
jurors
challenged
serve
jury
prosecutors
explained
peremptory
challenges
six
potential
jurors
based
ambivalence
death
penalty
hesitancy
vote
execute
defendants
capable
rehabilitated
jurors
family
history
criminality
rebuttal
prosecution
explanation
petitioner
identified
two
empaneled
white
jurors
expressed
ambivalence
death
penalty
manner
similar
counterparts
subject
prosecutorial
peremptory
challenges
one
indicated
capital
punishment
appropriate
first
offense
another
stated
difficult
impose
death
sentence
similarly
two
white
jurors
expressed
hesitation
sentencing
death
defendant
might
rehabilitated
four
white
jurors
family
members
criminal
histories
consequence
even
though
prosecution
reasons
striking
members
venire
appear
race
neutral
application
rationales
venire
might
selective
based
racial
considerations
whether
comparative
juror
analysis
demonstrate
prosecutors
rationales
pretexts
discrimination
unnecessary
determination
stage
evidence
make
debatable
district
conclusion
purposeful
discrimination
occurred
question
appeals
state
trial
dismissive
strained
interpretation
petitioner
evidence
disparate
questioning
findings
state
disparate
questioning
batson
jurors
fully
supported
record
petitioner
argues
prosecutors
sole
purpose
using
disparate
questioning
elicit
responses
venire
members
reflected
opposition
death
penalty
unwillingness
impose
minimum
sentence
either
justified
challenges
prosecution
applicable
state
law
remote
possibility
disparate
questioning
occur
petitioner
submits
disparate
questioning
created
appearance
divergent
opinions
even
though
venire
members
views
relevant
subject
might
follows
use
disparate
questioning
determined
race
outset
likely
justification
strike
based
resulting
divergent
views
pretextual
context
differences
questions
posed
prosecutors
evidence
purposeful
discrimination
batson
similarly
prosecutor
questions
statements
voir
dire
examination
exercising
challenges
may
support
refute
inference
discriminatory
purpose
preface
questions
views
prospective
jurors
held
death
penalty
prosecution
instances
gave
explicit
account
execution
process
prospective
jurors
asked
views
capital
punishment
preface
used
questioned
issue
white
persons
state
explains
disparity
asserting
disproportionate
number
venire
members
expressed
doubts
death
penalty
juror
questionnaires
accepted
without
inquiry
however
state
evidence
inconsistent
explanation
state
calculations
white
prospective
jurors
expressed
hesitation
death
penalty
questionnaires
however
group
whites
given
explicit
description
even
greater
disparity
along
racial
lines
consider
disparate
questioning
concerning
minimum
punishments
percent
whites
informed
statutory
minimum
sentence
compared
twelve
half
percent
explanation
proffered
statistical
disparity
pierre
louisiana
fact
testimony
challenged
evidence
appropriately
direct
brushed
aside
evidence
obtainable
contradict
disprove
testimony
offered
petitioner
assumed
state
refrained
introducing
quoting
norris
alabama
indeed
petitioner
appeal
pending
texas
criminal
appeals
found
batson
violation
precise
line
disparate
questioning
mandatory
minimums
employed
one
prosecutors
tried
instant
case
chambers
state
tex
crim
app
follows
view
fair
interpretation
record
threshold
examination
coa
analysis
prosecutors
designed
questions
elicit
responses
justify
removal
venire
batson
supra
circumstantial
evidence
invidious
intent
may
include
proof
disproportionate
impact
observed
circumstances
proof
discriminatory
impact
practical
purposes
demonstrate
unconstitutionality
various
circumstances
discrimination
difficult
explain
nonracial
agree
petitioner
prosecution
decision
seek
jury
shuffle
predominate
number
seated
front
panel
along
decision
delay
formal
objection
defense
shuffle
new
racial
composition
revealed
raise
suspicion
state
sought
exclude
jury
concerns
amplified
fact
state
also
apparently
ignored
testimony
demonstrating
dallas
county
district
attorney
office
admission
used
process
manipulate
racial
composition
jury
past
app
noting
prosecutor
admitted
requesting
jury
shuffle
predominant
number
first
six
eight
ten
jurors
blacks
even
though
practice
jury
shuffling
might
denominated
batson
claim
involve
peremptory
challenge
use
practice
tends
erode
credibility
prosecution
assertion
race
motivating
factor
jury
selection
finally
threshold
examination
accord
weight
petitioner
historical
evidence
racial
discrimination
district
attorney
office
evidence
presented
swain
hearing
indicates
almost
categorically
excluded
jury
service
batson
early
rejected
contention
absence
blacks
grand
jury
insufficient
support
inference
discrimination
summarily
asserting
accident
hardly
accounted
continuous
omission
negroes
grand
jury
lists
long
period
sixteen
years
quoting
hill
texas
hernandez
texas
taxes
credulity
say
mere
chance
resulted
members
class
among
six
thousand
jurors
called
past
years
federal
magistrate
judge
addressed
import
evidence
context
batson
claim
found
unexplained
disturbing
irrespective
whether
evidence
prove
sufficient
support
charge
systematic
exclusion
reveals
culture
district
attorney
office
past
suffused
bias
jury
selection
evidence
course
relevant
extent
casts
doubt
legitimacy
motives
underlying
state
actions
petitioner
case
even
presume
stage
prosecutors
case
part
culture
discrimination
evidence
suggests
likely
ignorant
prosecutors
joined
district
attorney
office
assistant
district
attorneys
received
formal
training
excluding
minorities
juries
supposition
race
factor
reinforced
fact
prosecutors
marked
race
prospective
juror
juror
cards
resolving
equal
protection
claim
petitioner
state
courts
made
mention
either
jury
shuffle
historical
record
purposeful
discrimination
adhere
proposition
state
need
make
detailed
findings
addressing
evidence
failure
however
diminish
significance
concerns
heightened
fact
presented
evidence
state
trial
somehow
reasoned
even
inference
discrimination
support
prima
facie
case
clear
error
state
declines
defend
particular
ruling
general
assertions
accepted
rebutting
defendant
prima
facie
case
equal
protection
clause
vain
illusory
requirement
batson
supra
quoting
norris
secure
habeas
relief
petitioner
must
demonstrate
state
finding
absence
purposeful
discrimination
incorrect
clear
convincing
evidence
corresponding
factual
determination
objectively
unreasonable
light
record
state
represents
us
petitioner
able
satisfy
burden
may
may
case
however
question
us
coa
inquiry
asks
district
decision
debatable
threshold
examination
convinces
us
judgment
fifth
circuit
reversed
case
remanded
proceedings
consistent
opinion
ordered
thomas
joe
petitioner
janie
cockrell
director
texas
department
criminal
justice
institutional
division
writ
certiorari
appeals
fifth
circuit
february
justice
scalia
concurring
join
opinion
write
separately
two
reasons
first
explain
believe
willingness
consider
antiterrorism
effective
death
penalty
act
aedpa
limits
habeas
relief
deciding
whether
issue
certificate
appealablity
coa
accord
text
second
discuss
evidence
state
side
case
though
inadequate
holds
make
absence
claimed
violation
batson
kentucky
undebatable
still
makes
view
close
case
many
appeals
decisions
denied
applications
coa
concluding
applicant
entitled
habeas
relief
merits
without
even
analyzing
whether
applicant
made
substantial
showing
denial
constitutional
right
see
kasi
angelone
wheat
johnson
today
disapproves
approach
improperly
resolves
merits
appeal
coa
stage
ante
less
clear
opinion
however
circuit
justice
judge
deciding
whether
issue
coa
must
look
district
application
aedpa
habeas
petitioner
constitutional
claims
ask
whether
resolution
debatable
amongst
jurists
reason
ante
emphasis
added
district
applied
aedpa
nothing
whether
coa
applicant
made
substantial
showing
denial
constitutional
right
required
aedpa
standard
seemingly
role
coa
inquiry
section
however
provides
certificate
appealability
may
issue
applicant
made
substantial
showing
denial
constitutional
right
emphasis
added
substantial
showing
entitle
applicant
coa
necessary
sufficient
condition
nothing
text
prohibits
circuit
justice
judge
imposing
additional
requirements
one
additional
requirement
approved
see
slack
mcdaniel
holding
habeas
petitioner
seeking
appeal
district
denial
habeas
relief
procedural
grounds
must
make
substantial
showing
denial
constitutional
right
also
must
demonstrate
jurists
reason
find
debatable
whether
district
correct
procedural
ruling
today
imposes
another
additional
requirement
circuit
justice
judge
must
deny
coa
even
habeas
petitioner
made
substantial
showing
constitutional
rights
violated
reasonable
jurists
conclude
substantive
provision
federal
habeas
statute
bars
relief
ante
give
example
suppose
state
prisoner
presents
constitutional
claim
reasonable
jurists
might
find
debatable
unable
find
clearly
established
precedent
support
claim
previously
rejected
merits
proceedings
view
coa
must
denied
even
habeas
petitioner
satisfies
substantial
showing
denial
constitutional
right
requirement
reasonable
jurists
agree
habeas
relief
impossible
obtain
approach
consonant
slack
accord
coa
purpose
preventing
meritless
habeas
appeals
compatible
text
make
substantial
showing
denial
constitutional
right
sufficient
condition
coa
ii
applying
coa
standard
petitioner
case
must
ask
whether
petitioner
made
substantial
showing
batson
violation
also
whether
reasonable
jurists
debate
petitioner
ability
obtain
habeas
relief
light
aedpa
facts
surrounding
petitioner
batson
claims
viewed
light
requirement
factual
determinations
overcome
clear
convincing
evidence
contrary
reveal
close
rather
clear
case
granting
coa
petitioner
maintains
following
six
jurors
victims
racially
motivated
peremptory
strikes
edwin
rand
wayman
kennedy
roderick
bozeman
billy
jean
fields
joe
warren
carrol
boggess
state
proffered
explanations
peremptory
challenge
five
challenged
primarily
views
imposing
death
penalty
rand
kennedy
bozeman
warren
boggess
one
fields
challenged
among
reasons
brother
convicted
drug
offenses
served
time
prison
asserting
reasons
challenges
state
satisfied
step
two
batson
see
purkett
elem
per
curiam
unless
petitioner
make
substantial
showing
showing
reasonable
jurists
debate
whether
state
fraudulently
recited
explanations
pretext
race
discrimination
satisfied
requirement
moreover
state
entered
finding
fact
prosecution
purported
reasons
exercising
peremptory
challenges
pretextual
app
coa
issue
unless
finding
reasonably
thought
contradicted
clear
convincing
evidence
see
determination
factual
issue
made
state
shall
presumed
correct
applicant
shall
burden
rebutting
presumption
correctness
clear
convincing
evidence
ante
weakness
petitioner
batson
claims
stems
difficulty
identifying
unchallenged
white
venireman
similarly
situated
six
aforementioned
veniremen
although
petitioner
claims
two
white
veniremen
sandra
hearn
marie
mazza
expressed
views
death
penalty
ambivalent
expressed
rand
kennedy
bozeman
warren
boggess
voir
dire
transcripts
clearly
bear
although
hearn
initially
stated
thought
death
penalty
inappropriate
offenders
also
said
see
reason
sit
jury
imposing
death
penalty
app
stated
someone
extreme
child
abuser
deserved
death
penalty
whether
offense
reply
brief
petitioner
hearn
also
made
statements
distaste
criminal
defendants
use
psychiatric
testimony
establish
incompetency
mazza
stated
views
death
penalty
follows
kind
hard
determining
somebody
life
whether
live
die
feel
something
accepted
courts
something
decision
think
make
one
way
app
compare
statements
sentiments
expressed
challenged
veniremen
kennedy
supported
death
penalty
cases
mass
murder
normally
say
average
murder
case
say
death
sentence
bozeman
supported
death
penalty
possible
way
rehabilitate
person
say
somebody
mentally
disturbed
something
like
say
manson
type
something
like
asked
prosecutors
whether
repeated
criminal
violent
conduct
indicate
person
beyond
rehabilitation
bozeman
replied
really
warren
refused
give
clear
answer
regarding
views
death
penalty
despite
numerous
questions
prosecutors
well
goes
back
situation
know
sometimes
asked
whether
death
penalty
accomplishes
anything
warren
answered
yes
sometimes
think
sometimes
think
sic
sometimes
mixed
feelings
things
like
ibid
asked
think
accomplishes
feel
warren
replied
know
ibid
boggess
referred
death
penalty
murder
said
whether
actually
go
murder
killing
another
person
taking
another
person
life
know
trouble
ibid
rand
closer
case
ambivalent
statement
know
right
say
tomorrow
might
later
rand
say
impose
death
penalty
juror
hearn
mazza
white
jurors
seated
also
said
sit
jury
imposed
death
penalty
petitioner
shown
one
veniremen
rand
may
ambivalent
death
penalty
white
jurors
hearn
mazza
perhaps
enough
permit
state
trial
deciding
issue
de
novo
observing
demeanor
prosecutors
disputed
jurors
find
batson
violation
federal
habeas
case
state
previously
entered
factfindings
six
jurors
challenged
race
petitioner
must
provide
clear
convincing
evidence
state
erred
requesting
coa
must
demonstrate
jurists
reason
debate
whether
standard
satisfied
ante
fields
sixth
venireman
petitioner
claims
challenged
race
supported
capital
punishment
however
brother
several
drug
convictions
served
time
prison
app
warren
boggess
two
veniremen
previously
discussed
also
relatives
criminal
convictions
warren
brother
convicted
fraud
relation
food
stamps
boggess
testified
defense
witness
nephew
trial
theft
reported
questionnaire
cousins
problems
law
joint
lodging
four
white
veniremen
petitioner
claims
also
relatives
criminal
histories
therefore
struck
prosecution
three
noad
vickery
cheryl
davis
chatta
nix
actually
struck
petitioner
fourth
joan
weiner
son
shoplifted
age
app
hardly
comparable
fields
situation
weiner
strong
state
juror
reasons
relatives
worked
law
enforcement
support
death
penalty
clear
unequivocal
reasons
conclusion
room
debate
merits
petitioner
batson
claim
far
removed
judgment
state
explanations
peremptory
strikes
implausible
observations
join
opinion
thomas
joe
petitioner
janie
cockrell
director
texas
department
criminal
justice
institutional
division
writ
certiorari
appeals
fifth
circuit
february
justice
thomas
dissenting
unpersuaded
petitioner
claims
state
trial
found
purposeful
discrimination
prosecut
ion
use
peremptory
strikes
app
finding
established
petitioner
failed
carry
burden
step
three
inquiry
set
batson
kentucky
title
requires
federal
habeas
presum
state
findings
fact
correct
unless
petitioner
rebut
presumption
clear
convincing
evidence
majority
decides
without
explanation
ignore
explicit
command
petitioner
shown
clear
convincing
evidence
peremptory
strikes
black
veniremen
exercised
race
merit
certificate
appealability
coa
respectfully
dissent
agrees
ante
state
finding
step
three
batson
finding
fact
ordinarily
subject
presumption
correctness
proceeding
instituted
application
writ
habeas
corpus
person
custody
pursuant
judgment
state
determination
factual
issue
made
state
shall
presumed
correct
applicant
shall
burden
rebutting
presumption
correctness
clear
convincing
evidence
however
implicitly
rejects
obvious
conclusion
coa
determination
part
proceeding
instituted
application
writ
habeas
corpus
instead
presuming
state
factfindings
correct
requires
holds
petitioner
need
show
reasonable
jurists
disagree
whether
provide
clear
convincing
evidence
finding
erroneous
ante
main
justification
conclusion
supposed
fidelity
slack
mcdaniel
see
ante
petitioner
must
demonstrate
reasonable
jurists
find
district
assessment
constitutional
claims
debatable
quoting
slack
supra
neither
slack
decision
addressing
coa
procedure
ever
considered
constitutional
claim
turns
entirely
issues
fact
circumstances
text
governs
unlike
majority
begin
plain
text
statute
instructs
federal
courts
treat
findings
fact
issue
constitutes
proceeding
purposes
word
proceeding
means
regular
orderly
progression
lawsuit
including
acts
events
time
commencement
entry
judgment
black
law
dictionary
ed
emphasis
added
coa
standing
alone
assert
grievance
anyone
seek
remedy
redress
legal
injury
even
require
side
nothing
request
permission
seek
review
hohn
scalia
dissenting
agree
majority
existence
coa
jurisdictional
prerequisite
merits
appeal
ante
however
takes
wrong
turn
implies
merits
appeal
part
habeas
process
proceeding
coa
determination
somehow
overwhelming
authority
including
majority
opinion
confirms
applies
merits
appeal
see
ante
weaver
bowersox
putman
head
johnson
gibson
francis
stone
weeks
snyder
mueller
angelone
ashford
gilmore
cf
sumner
mata
effective
death
penalty
act
aedpa
factual
deference
provision
virtually
identical
language
applies
merits
appeal
coa
determination
treated
differently
draws
distinction
merits
appeal
coa
silent
conclusion
contrary
simply
illogical
coa
status
jurisdictional
prerequisite
merits
appeal
requires
coa
determination
merits
appeal
considered
part
proceeding
rejection
conclusion
also
conflicts
practice
prior
aedpa
access
merits
appeal
federal
habeas
corpus
proceedings
governed
mechanism
similar
coa
known
certificate
probable
cause
cpc
see
slack
supra
also
standard
factual
deference
similar
though
weaker
standard
see
ed
provisions
indistinguishable
aedpa
purposes
courts
concluded
predecessor
applied
directly
cpc
proceeding
without
filtering
debatability
standard
used
cpc
coa
contexts
see
barnard
collins
cordova
collins
cases
support
straightforward
notion
like
predecessor
respect
cpc
proceedings
applies
directly
coa
proceeding
decision
hohn
supra
holds
coa
determination
constitutes
case
appeals
purposes
jurisdiction
contrary
hohn
hold
logic
require
coa
determination
regarded
separate
rest
habeas
proceeding
fact
hohn
rejected
proposition
request
proceed
appeals
regarded
threshold
inquiry
separate
merits
emphasis
added
indeed
hohn
analogized
coa
filing
notice
appeal
civil
context
consider
part
proceeding
instituted
complaint
trial
merits
appeal
also
errs
albeit
dicta
implies
delayed
state
factfinding
two
years
voir
dire
batson
excuse
weakened
factual
deference
ante
even
putting
aside
fact
appellate
direct
review
still
give
heavy
deference
credibility
reasoning
tension
plain
text
ignores
changes
wrought
aedpa
role
federal
courts
collateral
review
unlike
appellate
review
district
findings
fact
clear
error
establishes
presumption
correctness
requires
federal
habeas
assume
state
entered
findings
best
placed
factfinder
complete
record
ask
whether
petitioner
refute
factual
finding
clear
convincing
evidence
procedural
imperfections
ordinarily
affect
presumption
thus
matter
whether
state
judge
made
decision
two
years
late
record
admittedly
conditions
might
increase
odds
habeas
applicant
locate
helpful
evidence
presume
facts
correct
means
allow
habeas
applicant
evade
attacking
process
employed
state
factfinder
rather
actual
factfindings
reading
confirmed
changes
worked
aedpa
section
predecessor
create
exceptions
factual
deference
procedural
infirmities
example
prior
aedpa
federal
habeas
defer
determinations
fact
factfinding
procedure
employed
state
adequate
afford
full
fair
hearing
ed
material
facts
adequately
developed
state
hearing
applicant
receive
full
fair
adequate
hearing
removal
exceptions
forecloses
use
marginal
procedural
complaints
delay
voir
dire
batson
hearing
determine
whether
much
federal
habeas
defer
factfinding
section
simply
read
contain
implied
sliding
scale
deference
understand
disagree
view
however
dicta
actually
purport
interpret
text
ii
supplies
governing
legal
standard
petitioner
must
provide
clear
convincing
evidence
purposeful
discrimination
order
obtain
coa
petitioner
constitutional
claim
batson
turns
fact
reasonable
jurists
debate
ante
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
whether
batson
violation
occurred
petitioner
first
meets
burden
simple
truth
petitioner
presented
anything
remotely
resembling
clear
convincing
evidence
purposeful
discrimination
evidence
amassed
petitioner
grouped
four
categories
evidence
historical
discrimination
dallas
district
attorney
office
selection
juries
use
jury
shuffle
tactic
prosecution
alleged
similarity
white
veniremen
struck
prosecution
six
blacks
edwin
rand
wayman
kennedy
roderick
bozeman
billy
jean
fields
joe
warren
carroll
boggess
evidence
disparate
questioning
respect
veniremen
views
death
penalty
ability
impose
minimum
punishment
historical
evidence
entirely
circumstantial
much
majority
bring
say
casts
doubt
state
claim
discriminatory
practices
discontinued
petitioner
trial
ante
evidence
prosecution
used
jury
shuffles
proves
intentional
discrimination
forces
petitioner
admit
sought
eliminate
whites
jury
given
employed
tactic
even
prosecution
ultimately
two
categories
evidence
little
petitioner
address
genuineness
prosecutors
proffered
reasons
making
peremptory
strikes
particular
jurors
short
reasons
justice
scalia
finds
close
case
ante
concurring
opinion
reasons
correct
reading
losing
case
write
explore
two
arguments
advanced
petitioner
deemed
helpful
establishing
petitioner
debatable
entitlement
apparently
majority
debatability
quiry
requires
review
record
permissive
attitude
toward
coa
movant
representations
noted
petitioner
argues
prosecution
struck
six
blacks
rand
kennedy
bozeman
fields
warren
boggess
similarly
situated
unstruck
whites
see
need
repeat
justice
scalia
dissection
petitioner
tales
white
veniremen
ambivalent
death
penalty
kennedy
bozeman
warren
boggess
ante
concurring
opinion
however
majority
cursory
remark
three
state
proffered
rationales
striking
black
jurors
pertained
well
white
jurors
challenged
serve
jury
ante
emphasis
added
flatly
incorrect
deserves
discussion
three
challenged
peremptory
strikes
used
fields
warren
boggess
petitioner
even
correctly
alleged
existence
similarly
situated
white
veniremen
majority
discussion
subject
misleading
stating
prosecutors
explained
peremptory
challenges
six
black
potential
jurors
based
ambivalence
death
penalty
hesitancy
vote
execute
defendants
capable
rehabilitated
veniremens
family
history
criminality
ante
implication
six
challenged
veniremen
prosecution
gave
three
reasons
justifications
use
peremptory
strike
clarify
rand
kennedy
bozeman
warren
boggess
struck
ambivalence
death
penalty
fields
warren
boggess
struck
family
members
criminal
histories
bozeman
fields
struck
making
remarks
rehabilitation
simple
deduction
analysis
petitioner
contentions
includes
names
allegedly
similar
white
veniremen
cf
ante
reveals
petitioner
unearthed
white
venireman
like
warren
boggess
ambivalent
death
penalty
related
individuals
previous
brushes
petitioner
also
produces
white
venireman
like
fields
expressed
prodefense
views
rehabilitation
family
member
criminal
similarly
situated
mean
matching
one
several
reasons
prosecution
gave
striking
potential
juror
means
matching
leaves
rand
kennedy
petitioner
alleges
white
jurors
hearn
mazza
ambivalent
death
penalty
three
struck
black
veniremen
justice
scalia
adequately
demonstrated
absurd
respect
kennedy
bozeman
agree
petitioner
makes
slightly
better
case
rand
ante
concurring
opinion
however
since
burden
petitioner
show
clear
convincing
evidence
rand
struck
race
find
sliver
evidence
even
combined
petitioner
circumstantial
evidence
insufficient
rebut
presumption
petitioner
accounts
disparate
questioning
also
amount
little
substance
petitioner
argues
prosecution
posed
different
questions
voir
dire
depending
race
venireman
two
subjects
death
penalty
minimum
punishment
allowed
law
neither
accusation
withstand
careful
examination
full
record
help
petitioner
assemble
requisite
clear
convincing
evidence
respondent
counters
petitioner
complaints
graphic
formulation
script
arguing
depiction
used
potential
jurors
expressed
reservations
death
penalty
juror
questionnaires
brief
respondent
majority
discounts
explanation
stating
accepted
without
inquiry
ante
view
however
petitioner
bears
burden
showing
purposeful
discrimination
clear
convincing
evidence
treatment
issue
focuses
apparent
disparity
treatment
black
veniremen
white
veniremen
supposedly
similar
opposition
death
penalty
majority
notes
whites
got
graphic
description
blacks
ante
neglects
mention
eight
white
veniremen
petitioner
thinks
received
graphic
formulation
reply
brief
petitioner
emphatically
opposed
death
penalty
description
served
purpose
clarifying
position
issue
trial
lawyer
willingly
antagonize
potential
juror
ardently
opposed
death
penalty
extreme
portrait
implementation
strategy
pursued
prosecution
makes
perfect
sense
necessary
draw
venireman
feelings
death
penalty
use
graphic
script
overkill
record
demonstrates
six
eight
white
veniremen
opposed
death
penalty
stricken
cause
without
need
prosecution
spend
peremptory
challenge
example
john
nelson
wrote
questionnaire
believe
state
right
take
anyone
life
tr
voir
dire
crim
dist
dallas
county
tex
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
hereinafter
vdr
testified
flatly
able
vote
death
penalty
nelson
struck
cause
linda
berk
always
opposed
death
penalty
felt
strongly
subject
prosecutor
remarked
upon
discomfort
stated
ou
going
excuse
getting
little
emotional
okay
later
begun
crying
berk
struck
cause
gene
hinson
stated
curtly
put
form
agree
struck
cause
sheila
white
said
always
death
penalty
struck
cause
even
two
struck
cause
firm
views
margaret
gibson
said
believe
death
penalty
know
started
think
solves
anything
struck
prosecution
peremptory
strike
james
holtz
thought
death
penalty
appropriate
man
fireman
murdered
apprehend
simply
reason
fault
prosecution
failing
give
graphic
description
lethal
injection
prospective
jurors
firm
views
capital
punishment
recognize
voir
dire
statements
indirectly
support
respondent
explanation
graphic
script
typically
given
outset
voir
dire
quoted
veniremen
chance
give
stark
answers
nevertheless
available
evidence
supports
respondent
view
unclear
views
death
penalty
juror
questionnaires
received
graphic
formulation
adamantly
death
penalty
questionnaires
jury
forms
issue
asked
two
questions
directly
relevant
death
penalty
question
asked
believe
death
penalty
offered
potential
jurors
chance
circle
yes
asked
lease
explain
answer
see
joint
lodging
boggess
questionnaire
question
allowed
potential
jurors
circle
yes
answering
following
question
moral
religious
personal
beliefs
prevent
returning
verdict
ultimately
result
execution
another
human
ibid
first
already
noted
deeper
clearer
opposition
death
penalty
part
eight
whites
receive
graphic
script
petitioner
thinks
indirectly
supports
respondent
contention
opposition
came
questionnaires
presumably
answer
question
answer
yes
question
evidence
supporting
respondent
view
hinson
white
venireman
receive
graphic
formulation
stated
voir
dire
put
form
agree
death
penalty
moral
religious
reasons
vdr
similarly
nelson
white
venireman
receiving
graphic
formulation
stated
questionnaire
believe
state
right
take
anyone
life
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
fernando
guiterrez
juror
received
graphic
formulation
answered
yes
question
also
yes
question
indicating
moral
religious
personal
beliefs
obstruct
voting
death
penalty
despite
fact
believed
joint
lodging
prosecution
treated
black
veniremen
differently
blacks
receive
graphic
formulation
whose
questionnaires
contained
record
answered
yes
question
stating
believed
death
penalty
question
indicating
beliefs
prevent
imposing
death
sentence
see
bozeman
fields
warren
rand
black
veniremen
given
graphic
formulation
contrast
gave
ambiguous
answers
juror
questionnaires
expressing
hesitation
rather
philosophical
opposition
death
penalty
boggess
answered
yes
question
also
yes
question
kennedy
answered
yes
question
indicated
believed
death
penalty
nly
extreme
cases
multiple
murders
troy
woods
answered
question
also
question
indicating
believe
death
penalty
personal
objection
imposing
wrote
sic
punishment
space
provided
question
ibid
happened
completely
clear
questionnaire
hence
receiving
graphic
formulation
woods
enthusiastic
supporter
death
penalty
fact
seated
petitioner
jury
confirming
respondent
explanation
black
veniremen
linda
baker
janice
mackey
paul
bailey
anna
keaton
gave
unclear
responses
questions
received
graphic
formulation
see
tr
pretrial
hearings
crim
dist
dallas
county
tex
def
exh
sum
correlation
questionnaire
answers
use
graphic
script
far
stronger
correlation
race
sixteen
veniremen
clearly
indicated
questionnaires
feelings
death
receive
graphic
eight
veniremen
gave
unclear
answers
eight
veniremen
got
graphic
words
veniremen
questionnaire
information
available
answers
given
accurately
predict
whether
got
graphic
petitioner
theory
race
determined
whether
venireman
got
graphic
script
produces
correlation
far
petitioner
fares
better
allegation
prosecution
employed
two
different
scripts
basis
race
asking
questions
imposition
minimum
sentence
indeed
disparate
questioning
argument
flawed
last
one
respondent
admits
different
questioning
minimum
sentences
used
effort
get
veniremen
prosecution
felt
ambivalent
death
penalty
dismissed
cause
making
decision
whether
employ
manipulative
minimum
punishment
script
prosecutors
rely
questionnaires
substantial
voir
dire
testimony
minimum
punishment
questioning
occurred
much
later
voir
dire
graphic
formulation
seven
black
veniremen
given
allegedly
manipulative
minimum
punishment
script
opposed
death
penalty
varying
degrees
rand
kennedy
bozeman
warren
boggess
views
death
penalty
exhaustively
discussed
leaves
baker
fields
baker
views
death
penalty
clearly
ambivalent
even
subject
petitioner
batson
challenge
fields
family
history
criminality
views
rehabilitation
earlier
discussed
supra
convinced
prosecution
use
peremptory
finally
petitioner
objection
prosecution
decision
use
manipulative
punishment
script
woods
reply
brief
petitioner
makes
sense
woods
gave
answers
indicating
excellent
state
juror
prosecution
tried
eliminate
course
petitioner
correct
prosecution
sought
eliminate
blacks
one
might
expect
methods
including
use
manipulative
script
deployed
woods
happened
also
black
graphic
questioning
respondent
explanation
goes
unrebutted
petitioner
unless
venireman
indicated
poor
state
juror
using
criteria
respondent
identified
otherwise
struck
cause
agreement
reason
use
manipulative
script
thus
petitioner
points
state
failure
use
manipulative
method
vast
majority
white
veniremembers
expressed
reservations
death
penalty
ignores
fact
whites
expressed
opposition
death
penalty
struck
cause
agreement
meaning
manipulative
script
necessary
get
removed
two
whites
given
manipulative
script
peremptorily
like
rand
kennedy
bozeman
fields
warren
boggess
baker
quite
simply
petitioner
arguments
rest
circumstantial
evidence
speculation
hold
thorough
review
record
far
rebutting
presumption
petitioner
perhaps
even
demonstrated
reasonable
jurists
debate
whether
provided
requisite
evidence
purposeful
discrimination
majority
inquiry
mine
petitioner
demonstrated
clear
convincing
evidence
even
one
peremptory
strikes
issue
result
racial
discrimination
affirm
denial
coa
footnotes
regarded
logical
development
error
analyzing
request
coa
like
merits
appeal
courts
simply
allowed
merits
appeals
taken
without
coa
flat
contravention
see
bates
lee
footnotes
standard
factual
deference
provided
proceeding
instituted
federal
application
writ
habeas
corpus
person
custody
pursuant
judgment
state
determination
hearing
merits
factual
issue
made
state
competent
jurisdiction
shall
presumed
correct
unless
applicant
shall
establish
shall
otherwise
appear
respondent
shall
admit
enumerated
exceptions
omitted
evidentiary
hearing
burden
shall
rest
upon
applicant
establish
convincing
evidence
factual
determination
state
erroneous
factfinding
hindered
prosecutors
gave
reasons
strikes
black
veniremen
batson
hearing
one
joe
warren
issue
app
puzzled
majority
willingness
hold
respondent
failure
prosecutors
testify
batson
hearing
petitioner
easily
requested
reasons
allegedly
unconstitutional
peremptory
strikes
given
attorney
representing
state
batson
hearing
made
certain
trial
prosecutors
present
reiterate
reasons
gave
record
striking
challenged
black
veniremen
app
petitioner
counsel
explicitly
refused
opportunity
offered
ibid
furthermore
fail
understand
move
resulted
efficient
hearing
without
redundant
testimony
redound
benefit
petitioner
bears
burden
proof
federal
habeas
corpus
proceeding
however
agree
majority
decisions
hernandez
new
york
purkett
elem
per
curiam
helpful
guiding
federal
habeas
deciding
claim
batson
kentucky
instance
cases
confirm
batson
step
three
turns
evaluation
prosecutor
proffered
justifications
peremptory
challenges
issue
purkett
supra
hernandez
greatly
doubt
congress
intended
authorize
broader
federal
review
state
credibility
determinations
authorized
appeals
within
federal
system
petitioner
shuffled
jury
five
times
prosecution
three
times
brief
respondent
petitioner
directs
white
veniremen
noad
vickery
cheryl
davis
chatta
nix
joan
weiner
family
members
criminal
histories
points
white
veniremen
sandra
hearn
marie
mazza
equally
ambivalent
death
penalty
brief
petitioner
course
justice
scalia
demonstrates
hearn
mazza
ambivalent
death
penalty
ante
concurring
opinion
petitioner
points
vickery
davis
nix
weiner
similar
family
histories
justice
scalia
shown
none
four
fact
similarly
situated
fields
respect
justification
ante
concurring
opinion
petitioner
also
alleges
hearn
made
remarks
rehabilitation
similar
made
fields
white
venireman
even
allegedly
fits
reasons
given
striking
fields
furthermore
even
fields
struck
views
rehabilitation
views
way
equivalent
expressed
hearn
fields
answered
yes
question
whether
believed
everyone
rehabilitated
app
fields
went
say
may
feel
like
person
opportunity
really
talked
god
commits
whereas
committed
offense
turns
life
around
rehabilitation
ibid
contrast
hearn
stated
believe
death
penalty
criminal
rehabilitated
petitioner
tries
muddy
waters
pointing
fields
respects
good
state
juror
supported
death
penalty
brief
petitioner
however
change
fact
fields
said
everyone
rehabilitated
thus
might
swayed
penitent
defendant
testimony
hearn
insisted
people
rehabilitated
analyzing
batson
claims
focus
reasonableness
asserted
nonracial
motive
rather
genuineness
motive
purkett
emphasis
original
prosecution
stated
reasons
striking
bozeman
ambivalent
death
penalty
made
remarks
rehabilitation
one
case
prosecution
gave
multiple
reasons
strike
petitioner
actually
correctly
alleged
existence
similarly
situated
white
venireman
hearn
petitioner
believes
albeit
erroneously
see
ante
scalia
concurring
hearn
expressed
similar
ambivalence
death
penalty
made
remarks
rehabilitation
nelson
also
doctor
presumably
need
lethal
injection
process
described
questions
responses
thereto
found
page
questionnaire
baker
circle
yes
answering
question
wrote
strongest
feeling
death
penalty
however
aware
overcrowding
jails
number
murders
know
facts
make
decision
emphasis
added
baker
also
answer
question
writing
undecided
instead
mackey
answered
question
indicating
believe
death
penalty
wrote
thou
shall
kill
explanation
space
proceeded
answer
question
well
bailey
circled
yes
answering
question
wrote
circle
around
along
explanations
yes
major
crime
one
sic
right
take
anothe
sic
ones
sic
life
emphasis
original
circled
answering
question
keaton
circled
indicating
believe
death
penalty
answered
question
writing
punished
sic
anyone
however
circled
answering
question
indicating
objection
imposing
death
penalty
see
vdr
hinson
nelson
joint
lodging
bozeman
fields
warren
rand
mary
sumrow
ronnie
long
weiner
mazza
vivian
sztybel
debra
mcdowell
kevin
duke
brenda
walsh
filemon
zablan
hearn
sztybel
received
graphic
script
vdr
boggess
kennedy
baker
mackey
bailey
keaton
guiterrez
woods
analysis
considers
hinson
nelson
clearly
opposed
death
penalty
questionnaires
answering
question
question
yes
kennedy
ambiguous
though
fact
answered
question
yes
even
without
assumptions
veniremen
answered
yes
question
question
indicating
clear
support
death
penalty
receive
graphic
script
seven
seven
answering
yes
yes
indicating
ambiguous
mixed
feelings
death
penalty
answering
clearly
received
graphic
script
yields
accuracy
rate
whites
get
graphic
script
blacks
get
graphic
script
means
race
predicted
use
graphic
script
time
prosecution
fact
used
peremptory
strikes
seven
black
veniremen
see
joint
lodging
vdr
gibson
holtz