Comment, Criminal Procedure - The Quintessential Exercise of the Peremptory Challenge: Denial of Peremptory Strike Possibly Violates Section One of the Kentucky Constitution

23 Pages Posted: 12 Jun 2008 Last revised: 31 Jul 2013

See all articles by Michael Smolensky

Michael Smolensky

Rutgers University School of Law - Camden

Date Written: 2007

Abstract

Sex-based and race-based peremptory strikes violate the Equal Protection Clause. These restrictions have prompted some scholars and jurists to speculate about the peremptory strike's demise.

But what if a court requires the use of a peremptory strike to remove a suspected panel member because it erroneously denied a motion for cause?

This paper analyzes the text, history, precedent, and policy both favoring and against the protection of the peremptory under the Kentucky Constitution.

Keywords: state constitution, Kentucky, peremptory strike, motion for cause, jury, voir dire, New Judicial Federalism, legal history

JEL Classification: K14

Suggested Citation

Smolensky, Michael, Comment, Criminal Procedure - The Quintessential Exercise of the Peremptory Challenge: Denial of Peremptory Strike Possibly Violates Section One of the Kentucky Constitution (2007). Rutgers Law Journal, Vol. 38, No. 4, pp. 1485-1507, 2007, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1143026

Michael Smolensky (Contact Author)

Rutgers University School of Law - Camden ( email )

Camden, NJ 08102
United States

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
66
Abstract Views
1,241
rank
461,691
PlumX Metrics