Analysis Summary:

The article appears mostly accurate based on the available sources, with the core claim about the appeals court ruling supported. However, the snippet provided is limited, and some details are not verifiable with the given sources. There's a moderate bias due to the focus on potential constitutional rights violations, which could be interpreted as leaning against the prosecution.

Detailed Analysis:

• Claim:** A federal appellate panel said that Michael Sockwell was eligible to be retried because prosecutors systematically eliminated Black potential jurors at his 1990 murder trial.
  • Verification Source #1: Supports this claim, stating "A federal appeals court ruled Alabama prosecutors violated the constitutional rights of a man sentenced to death in 1990, saying Blacks were..." This aligns with the article's claim.
  • Verification Source #2, 3, 4, and 5: Do not directly cover this specific case or ruling. They discuss broader issues related to death row appeals and constitutional rights in Alabama.
  • Internal Knowledge:* Without access to the full article or more specific sources, it's difficult to verify the "systematically eliminated" aspect beyond the general agreement that a constitutional violation occurred related to jury selection.

Supporting Evidence/Contradictions:

• Verification Source #1: provides direct support for the core claim that an appeals court ruled Alabama prosecutors violated the constitutional rights of a man sentenced to death in 1990 due to issues related to Black jurors.
• Verification Source #2, 3, 4, and 5: While they don't contradict the claim, their focus on other death penalty cases and appeal processes in Alabama means they don't offer specific verification or contradiction for the details of the Sockwell case.