Connection lost
Server error
Lockhart v. McCree Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: The Supreme Court held that removing prospective jurors who oppose the death penalty from a capital case jury pool before the guilt phase does not violate a defendant’s Sixth Amendment rights to an impartial jury or a jury selected from a fair cross-section of the community.
Legal Significance: This case established that a “death-qualified” jury is constitutionally permissible for determining guilt in a capital trial, rejecting the argument that such juries are inherently biased towards conviction and upholding the state’s interest in using a single jury for both guilt and penalty phases.
Lockhart v. McCree Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Ardia McCree was charged with capital felony murder in Arkansas. During voir dire, the trial judge, over McCree’s objections, removed for cause eight prospective jurors who stated they could not under any circumstances vote to impose the death penalty. This process is known as “death qualification.” The selected jury convicted McCree of capital felony murder but, during the sentencing phase, rejected the state’s request for the death penalty and sentenced him to life imprisonment without parole. After exhausting state appeals, McCree filed a federal habeas corpus petition. He argued that the removal of jurors unalterably opposed to the death penalty (“Witherspoon-excludables”) violated his Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights to an impartial jury and a jury selected from a representative cross-section of the community. The District Court and the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed, finding, based on social science studies, that death-qualified juries are more prone to convict than non-death-qualified juries. The Supreme Court granted certiorari to resolve a circuit split on the issue.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Does the Constitution prohibit the removal for cause, prior to the guilt-innocence phase of a bifurcated capital trial, of prospective jurors whose opposition to the death penalty would prevent or substantially impair the performance of their duties at the sentencing phase?
No. The Constitution does not prohibit the removal for cause of prospective Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Does the Constitution prohibit the removal for cause, prior to the guilt-innocence phase of a bifurcated capital trial, of prospective jurors whose opposition to the death penalty would prevent or substantially impair the performance of their duties at the sentencing phase?
Conclusion
This decision validates the practice of using "death-qualified" juries for the guilt Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nos
Legal Rule
The Sixth Amendment's fair-cross-section requirement applies to jury venires, not to petit Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum
Legal Analysis
The Court rejected McCree's Sixth Amendment claims on two primary grounds. First, Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- The Constitution does not prohibit “death qualification”-the removal of jurors whose