# Johnson v. California > Supreme Court of the United States · June 13, 2005 · 545 U.S. 162 URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9499992 ## Case - **Full name:** Johnson v. California - **Court:** Supreme Court of the United States - **Decided:** June 13, 2005 - **Citations:** 545 U.S. 162; 8 A.L.R. Fed. 2d 849; 125 S. Ct. 2410; 162 L. Ed. 2d 129; 2005 U.S. LEXIS 4842 - **Precedential status:** Published - **Opinion:** Concurrence by Breyer - **Judges:** Stevens, Breyer, Thomas - **Cited by:** 912 later opinions in the Frix Law Library ## Citator (automated) - **Yellow flag:** Questioned by Commonwealth v. Jones, 597 Pa. 286 (2008). - Negative treatments: 1 - Distinguished by: 0 - Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9499992 ## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction) - finding as an inappropriate yardstick by which to measure the sufficiency of a prima facie case of purposeful discrimination California's "more likely than not" standard and reversing defendant's conviction because the permissible inferences of discrimination, which caused the… - holding that it violated Batson for a state court to speculate about plausible race-neutral reasons for striking jurors in determining whether the defense had made out a prima facie case under People v. Wheeler, 583 P.2d 748 (Cal. 1978), and noting that “[t]he inherent uncerta… - holding that clear and convincing evidence showed that the prosecution’s strikes were racially determined when: no facts other than race could explain the strikes; the prosecution used shuffling and disparate questioning during the selection; the prosecution expressed pretextu… - holding that a prima facie case under Batson had been established when “the inference of discrimination was sufficient to invoke a comment by the trial judge that ‘we are very close,’ and on review, the California Supreme Court acknowledged that ‘it certainly looks suspicious … - finding that the inference of discrimination was raised where the prosecutor used his peremptory challenges to strike all three of the prospective African American jurors from a panel of 43 eligible jurors and the prosecutor "had no apparent reason to challenge [a] prospective… ## Opinion text Justice Breyer, concurring. I join the Court’s opinion while maintaining here the views I set forth in my concurring opinion in Miller-El v. Dretke, post, p. 266. --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9499992. Public record. Not legal advice.