BThomas_CRJ552_MOD4 (Batson vs

.docx

School

Kaplan University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

LS501

Subject

Law

Date

Jan 9, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by brittaneyt14

CRJ 552 Criminal Advocacy & Judicial Procedure Jury Selection (Voire Dire) and Opening Statements TITLE AND CITATION : Batson vs. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986) TYPE OF ACTION : Review by the U.S. Supreme Court of a lower court ruling of the State’s use of peremptory challenges to strike all black jurors from the trial of a black man. FACTS OF THE CASE : Batson was indicted in Kentucky on charges of burglary and receipt of stolen goods. During trial, the judge conducted voir dire and excused certain jurors for cause. When it came time for peremptory challenges, the prosecutor used his to remove all the black persons left on the venire, which left Batson, a black man, to be tried by an all-white jury. Defense counsel objected before the jury was sworn in, and the judge overruled the objection on the grounds that peremptory challenges could be against “anybody they want.” Petitioner was convicted on both counts. CONTENTIONS OF THE PARTIES: Batson: Defendant argued that his rights were being violated when the State removed all the black jurors. Kentucky: The state argued that peremptory challenges could be used on anyone without given reason. ISSUE: Does the use of peremptory challenges to remove a potential juror from the jury pool based on race, violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution? DECISION: Yes. REASONING: The Court held that, while a defendant is not entitled to have a jury completely or partially composed of people of his own race, the State is not permitted to use its peremptory challenges to automatically exclude potential members of the jury because of their race. RULE OF LAW: Equal Protection Clause forbids prosecutor from challenging potential jurors solely on account of their race or on the assumption that black jurors as a group will be unable to impartially consider the State's case against a black defendant, and (2) to establish a prima facie case of purposeful discrimination in selection of the petit jury defendant must first show that he is a member of a cognizable racial group, that prosecutor has exercised peremptory challenges to remove from the venire members of the defendant's race and that the facts and any other relevant circumstances raise an inference that the prosecutor used that practice to exclude the veniremen from the petit jury on account of their race.

Discover more documents: Sign up today!

Unlock a world of knowledge! Explore tailored content for a richer learning experience. Here's what you'll get:

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help