翻訳と辞書 Words near each other ・ Rich Behm ・ Rich Benjamin ・ Rich Bernward Gospels ・ Rich Bickle ・ Rice transplanter ・ Rice tungro bacilliform virus ・ Rice tungro spherical virus ・ Rice University ・ Rice University Electrical and Computer Engineering ・ Rice University Press ・ Rice University School of Architecture ・ Rice University School of Humanities ・ Rice University School of Social Sciences ・ Rice v Connolly ・ Rice v. Cayetano ・ Rice v. Collins ・ Rice v. Norman Williams Co. ・ Rice v. Rehner ・ Rice v. Santa Fe Elevator Corp. ・ Rice Valley Wilderness ・ Rice Vaughan ・ Rice vermicelli ・ Rice Video ・ Rice Village ・ Rice vinegar ・ Rice W. Means ・ Rice water ・ Rice weevil ・ Rice wine ・ Rice writing Dictionary Lists mini英和辞書 mini和英辞書 Webster 1913 Latin-English FOLDOC Wikipedia English ウィキペディア

翻訳と辞書　辞書検索 [ 開発暫定版 ] スポンサード リンク Rice v. Collins ： ウィキペディア英語版 Rice v. Collins ''Rice v. Collins'' 546 U.S. 333 (2006),〔(Full text of the opinion from Findlaw.com )〕 was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States regarding a prosecutor's use of a peremptory challenge to remove a young African American woman, Juror 16, from a defendant's drug trial jury in a California court case, based on her youth and on her alleged "eye rolling" in answer to a question. The defendant, Steven Martell Collins, challenged the striking of Juror 16, saying her exclusion was based on race, but the trial judge agreed that the prosecutor's reasons were race-neutral. The California Court of Appeal upheld the trial court's ruling, and the Federal District Court dismissed Collins' habeas corpus petition with prejudice. However, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed and remanded, stating that the dismissal was unreasonable based, among other reasons, on the lack of evidence that the eye rolling had occurred. ==History== In ''Batson v. Kentucky'' (1986) the Supreme Court ruled that a prosecutor cannot systematically use peremptory challenges to strike jurors based on race. The court set forth a three-step process in evaluating claims of discrimination. First, the defendant must present reasons that support the contention that the prosecutor's peremptory challenges were based on race. Second, the State must produce race-neutral explanations for the peremptory challenge. Third, the trial court must determine if the peremptory challenges were based on race or on other factors. In ''Georgia v. McCollum'' (1992) the Court ruled that the three-step procedure applied equally to the defense, and in ''J.E.B. v. Alabama ex rel. T.B.'' (1994) to challenges based on gender. However the Court has always held, inter alia, the ultimate burden of proving or disproving racial motivation for the strike always falls on the party challenging the strike.〔 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Rice v. Collins」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク 翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.