explaining prosecutors pass step two if their reason was based on “legitimate hunches and past experience”
How later courts described this case
- explaining prosecutors pass step two if their reason was based on “legitimate hunches and past experience”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
Justice Whichard
concurring.
On the issue presented by defendant’s sixth assignment of error, I joined in Justice Frye’s dissenting opinions in State v. McCarver, *29 341 N.C. 364 , 462 S.E.2d 25 (1995), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 134 L. Ed. 2d 482 (1996), and State v. McLaughlin, 341 N.C. 426 , 462 S.E.2d (1995), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 133 L. Ed. 2d 879 , (1996). I continue to believe those dissenting opinions were correct. A majority of this Court ruled to the contrary, however, and the United States Supreme Court has since denied certiorari in those cases. I thus now consider myself bound by the majority position and will no longer dissent or concur in the result in cases presenting the issue of unanimity as to Issues Three and Four.
Justice Frye joins in this concurring opinion.