ROMINGER
LEGAL
Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals Opinions -
5th Circuit
NOT FINDING
WHAT YOU NEED? -CLICK HERE
|
ROMINGER
LEGAL
|
||||||||||
|
Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals Opinions -
5th Circuit
|
||||||||||
| Need Legal Help? | ||||||||||
|
NOT FINDING
WHAT YOU NEED? -CLICK HERE
|
||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This
opinion or court case is from the Fifth Circuit Court or Appeals.
Search our site for more cases - CLICK
HERE |
|
|
Case Law - save on Lexis / WestLaw. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS May 12, 2003 For the Fifth Circuit Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 00-10784 THOMAS JOE MILLER-EL, Petitioner-Appellant, VERSUS GARY L. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION, Respondent-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court For the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Before DAVIS, JONES, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: The Supreme Court has reversed the decision of this Court entered on August 7, 2001, and published at 261 F.3d 445, and has remanded this case to our Court "for further proceedings consistent with the Supreme Court's opinion" decided February 25, 2003 in No. 01-7662. For the reasons stated by the Supreme Court in its opinion, we now issue a Certificate of Appealability (COA)on Petitioner's jury selection claim premised on Batson1. Accordingly, as suggested by the Supreme Court, the issue now before our Court is whether "Petitioner [has] demonstrate[d] that the state trial court's findings of the absence of purposeful discrimination was incorrect by clear and convincing evidence, 28 U.S.C. §2254 (e)(1) and that the corresponding factual determination was "`objectively unreasonable' in light of the record before the court," when viewed in the light of (1) `Petitioner's historical evidence of racial discrimination by the district attorney's office', (2) the `substantial evidence Petitioner put forth in support of his prima facia case', (3) the decisions of both the prosecution and the defense to call for a jury shuffle and (4) the evidence proffered by the defense as to disparate questioning of prospective jurors by the prosecution." We direct the parties to submit supplemental briefs focusing specifically on these issues with full and complete record citations as to relevant evidence and testimony. We instruct the clerk of this court to set a briefing schedule so that briefing will be complete within 45 days. 1Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986) 2 |
|
|
NOW - CASE
LAW - All 50 States - Federal Courts - Try
it for FREE
We
now have full text legal news
drawn from all the major sources!!
Pennsylvania Lawyer Help Board
Find An Attorney
TERMS
OF USE - DISCLAIMER - LINKING POLICIES
Created and Developed by
Rominger Legal
Copyright 1997 - 2010.
A Division of
ROMINGER, INC.
