# People v. Allen

> California Supreme Court · February 13, 1979 · 23 Cal. 3d 286

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9538419

## Case

- **Full name:** The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. EUGENE ALLEN and ERNEST GRAHAM, Defendants and Appellants
- **Court:** California Supreme Court
- **Decided:** February 13, 1979
- **Citations:** 23 Cal. 3d 286; 152 Cal. Rptr. 454; 590 P.2d 30; 1979 Cal. LEXIS 200
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Richardson
- **Judges:** Richardson, Tobriner
- **Cited by:** 26 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9538419

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- noting as one of four factors of defendant’s prima facie case CARRERA V . AYERS 13 “that the district attorney had excluded many black persons after engaging in no more than desultory voir dire” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)
- noting as one of four factors of defendant’s prima facie case “that the district attorney had excluded many black persons after engaging in no more than desultory voir dire” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)

## Opinion text

RICHARDSON, J
I concur in the judgment solely under the compulsion of the rule announced by the present majority in People v. Wheeler (1978) 22 Cal.3d 258 [ 148 Cal.Rptr. 890 , 583 P.2d 748 ], As indicated in my dissent in that case (id, p. 288), Wheeler , in my view, was wrongly decided. Peremptory challenges may be exercised by counsel on either side without justification, excuse, or explanation to anyone.
Clark, J., concurred.
Respondent’s petition for a rehearing was denied March 29, 1979.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9538419. Public record. Not legal advice.