defendant was entitled to introduce evidence that the prosecutor had used peremptory challenges to remove black panel members in two similar cases. See also Edwards v. Thigpen, 682 F.Supp. 1374, 1375-81 (S.D.Miss.1987) (admitting evidence of a pattern of excluding black jurors in 318 trials over a period of nine years), aff'd sub nom. Edwards v. Scraggy, 849 F.2d 204 (5th Cir.1988), cert. denied sub nom. Edwards v. Black, 489 U.S. 1059, 109 S.Ct. 1328, 103 L.Ed.2d 597 (1989). The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has held that the trial court must consider “any evidence offered by a defendant to show a pattern or practice of a prosecutor using peremptory challenges in a racially discriminatory manner.” Keeton, 749 S.W.2d at 866 (quoting State v. Antwin .App.—Eastland 1994, writ denied) (<HOLDING>). 2 . See generally Elaine A. Carlson, Batson,
holding that where it is alleged that state has violated rights conferred by constitution governmental immunity is not available in state court action but declining to infer a right to sue the state for damages on the basis of a violation of the michigan constitution recognizing private right of action holding that there is no private right of action against a state governmental entity for violations of the texas constitution recognizing that no private right of action exists for subsection a violations holding that no private right of action exists