Capitol Hill Hospital v. Baucom
697 A.2d 760, 1997 D.C. App. LEXIS 127
District of Columbia Court of Appeals·Decided May 29, 1997·No. 94-CV-275, 92-CV-282·Published·Cited by 13 cases
Opinions
The judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the trial court for further consideration of the question whether, during voir dire, counsel for plaintiff exercised his peremptory challenges in a racially discriminatory manner. On remand, the trial judge shall accord appropriate weight to the statistical evidence, and shall apply a more rigorous standard of scrutiny to counsel’s explanations for his strikes.
So ordered.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Capitol Hill Hospital v. Baucom, 697 A.2d 760, 1997 D.C. App. LEXIS 127 (D.C. 1997).
697 A.2d 760 (Capitol Hill Hospital v. Baucom) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Hsieh v. Formosan Ass'n for Public Affairs
District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 2024
Travis Delonte Haney v. United States
206 A.3d 854 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 2019)
State v. Inman
760 S.E.2d 105 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 2014)
Hassan, Adbihakim
369 S.W.3d 872 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2012)
State v. Headen
697 S.E.2d 407 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2010)
Smith v. United States
966 A.2d 367 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 2009)
Robinson v. United States
878 A.2d 1273 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 2005)
People v. Brown
769 N.E.2d 1266 (New York Court of Appeals, 2002)
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority v. Jeanty
718 A.2d 172 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1998)
Capitol Hill Hospital v. Baucom
697 A.2d 760 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1997)