Arnold v. North Carolina

Decision Date06 April 1964
Docket NumberNo. 572,572
Citation84 S.Ct. 1032,12 L.Ed.2d 77,376 U.S. 773
PartiesJesse James ARNOLD and George Dixon, Petitioners, v. NORTH CAROLINA
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

J. Harvey Turner and Fred W. Harrison, Kinston, N.C., for petitioners.

Ralph Moody, Raleigh, N.C., for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petitioners, Arnold and Dixon, were found guilty of m rder by a jury and their convictions were affirmed, the Supreme Court of North Carolina concluding that they had not made out a case of systematic exclusion of Negroes from the grand jury which returned the indictment.258 N.C. 563, 129 S.E.2d 229.In support of their motion to quash the indictment because of consistent exclusion of Negroes from grand jury service, petitioners both Negroes, offered testimony of the county tax supervisor showing that the tax records of the county, on which Negro and white persons are listed separately and from which the names of jurors are derived, revealed 12,250 white persons and 4,819 Negroes in the county, with 5,583 white men and 2,499 Negro men listed for poll tax.In addition, the clerk of the trial court testified that while there have been as many as four or five Negroes upon the regular jury panel from which grand jurors have been chosen, in his 24 years as clerk he could remember only one Negro serving on a ground jury, another having been selected but excused.This evidence was uncontradicted, the State cross-examining the witnesses but offering no evidence.

The judgment below must be reversed.The 'testimony in itself made out a prima facie case of the denial of the equal protection which the Constitution guarantees.'Norris...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
75 cases
  • Colvin v. State
    • United States
    • Maryland Court of Appeals
    • 16 Marzo 1984
    ...jury, and few if any Negroes had served on petit jury panels, up to the time of the defendant's trial); Arnold v. North Carolina, 376 U.S. 773, 84 S.Ct. 1032, 12 L.Ed.2d 77 (1964) (prima facie case of systematic exclusion of Negroes established by testimony of court clerk that in 24 years o......
  • State ex rel. Henderson v. Russell
    • United States
    • Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 6 Julio 1970
    ...ex rel. Goldsby vs. Harpole, supra; United States, ex rel. Seals vs. Winan, 304 F. (2d) 53 (1962); Arnold vs. North Carolina, 376 U.S. 773, 84 S.Ct. 1032, 12 L.Ed. (2d) 77 (1964). 'While a full evidentiary hearing may not be warranted or proper for every petition for habeas corpus in this S......
  • Peters v. Kiff 8212 5078
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • 22 Junio 1972
    ... ... 6. Alexander v. Louisiana, 405 U.S. 625, 92 S.Ct. 1221, 31 ... L.Ed.2d 536 (1972); Arnold v. North Carolina, 376 U.S. 773, 84 ... S.Ct. 153, 11 L.Ed.2d 110 (1964); Eubanks v. Louisiana, ... ...
  • Francis v. Henderson 10, 1975
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • 3 Mayo 1976
    ...88 S.Ct. 523, 19 L.Ed.2d 634 (1967); Whitus v. Georgia, 385 U.S. 545, 87 S.Ct. 643, 17 L.Ed.2d 599 (1967); Arnold v. North Carolina, 376 U.S. 773, 84 S.Ct. 1032, 12 L.Ed.2d 77 (1964); Eubanks v. Louisiana, 356 U.S. 584, 78 S.Ct. 970, 2 L.Ed.2d 991 (1958); Smith v. Texas, 311 U.S. 128, 61 S.......
  • Get Started for Free
1 books & journal articles
  • Section 21.8 Burden of Proof
    • United States
    • The Missouri Bar Practice Books Criminal Practice Deskbook Chapter 21 Voir Dire and Jury Selection
    • Invalid date
    ...particular group is sufficient to make a prima facie case of discrimination. Norris v. Ala., 294 U.S. 587 (1935). See also Arnold v. N.C., 376 U.S. 773 (1964); Brown v. Allen, 344 U.S. 443 (1953); State v. Logan, 111 S.W.2d 110 (Mo. 1937); cf. Strawther, 476 S.W.2d 576. See John E. Curran, ......