Cox v. State
Decision Date | 13 November 1992 |
Citation | 629 So.2d 664 |
Parties | Tony Andre COX v. STATE. CR 91-497. |
Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
William J. Brower, Birmingham, for appellant.
James H. Evans, Atty. Gen., and Jean Brown, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
The appellant, Tony Andre Cox, was convicted of robbery in the first degree and was sentenced to 20 years' imprisonment. He raises two issues on this appeal from that conviction.
We find a clear violation of the principles of Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986).
The proceedings concerning this matter that appear in the record on appeal are as follows:
In Richmond v. State, 590 So.2d 384 (Ala.Cr.App.1991), this Court reversed the trial court on the ground that "[t]he prosecutrix's reason for striking venire member number 234 was based on conjecture and assumed bias and prejudice on the part of that member." 590 So.2d at 386.
In Richmond, although we did not specifically predicate error on the prosecutrix's striking of one black veniremember because she was "single," this Court did make the following observation:
[Ex parte Bird, 594 So.2d at 682-83]." Richmond, 590 So.2d at 385 (emphasis added).
Where the challenged party's explanations for its strikes are a part of the record, those explanations must be reviewed by the appellate courts regardless of the manner in which they came to be in the record. The Alabama Supreme Court has "h[e]ld that in reviewing allegations that the prosecution has exercised its peremptory challenges in a racially discriminatory manner, the reviewing court's inquiry, whether the State's explanations are offered voluntarily or by order of the trial judge, shall not be restricted by the mutable and often overlapping boundaries inherent within a Batson-analysis framework, but, rather, shall focus solely upon the 'propriety of the ultimate finding of discrimination vel non.' " Ex parte Huntley, 627 So.2d 1013, 1016 (Ala.1992) ( ). If any of the explanations advanced by a prosecutor are deemed to be insufficient, the defendant's conviction will be reversed, even if the defendant did not establish a prima facie case. See Huntley v. State, 627 So.2d 1011 (Ala.Cr.App.1991), affirmed, 627 So.2d 1013 (Ala.1992); Jackson v. State, 594 So.2d 1289, 1292-94 (Ala.Cr.App.1991).
Here, the trial court could have determined that the appellant had failed to present a prima facie case of discrimination and could not have required the prosecutrix to state her reasons for her strikes of black veniremembers. See Long v. State, 615 So.2d 114 (Ala.Cr.App.1992) 1.
The explanations for the strikes must be "clear, specific, and legitimate," "relate[d] to the particular case to be tried," and "nondiscriminatory." Ex parte Branch, 526 So.2d 609, 623 (Ala.1987) (emphasis omitted). In Hernandez v. New York, 500 U.S. 352, ----, 111 S.Ct. 1859, 1866, 114 L.Ed.2d 395 (1991), the Court further elaborated on the required explanation:
The reasons stated by the prosecutor "need...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Kidd v. State
...explanations must be reviewed by the appellate courts regardless of the manner in which they came to be in the record." Cox v. State, 629 So.2d 664, 667 (Ala.Cr.App.1992), reversed as to outcome, 629 So.2d 670 (Ala.1993). See also Jackson v. State, 594 So.2d at 1293, and cases cited therein......
-
Johnson v. State
...a discriminatory intent is inherent in the prosecutor's explanation, the reason offered will be deemed race-neutral.' " Cox v. State, 629 So.2d 664, 667 (Ala.Cr.App.1992), reversed, 629 So.2d 670 Based on the explanation given by the prosecutor, the race of the juror was not the sole basis ......
-
Alexander v. State
...The reasons for the prosecution's strikes may upon further inquiry by the trial court prove to be race neutral." Cox v. State, 629 So.2d 664, 667 (Ala.Cr.App.1992). "The failure to articulate a sufficient race-neutral reason for excluding even a single black veniremember may entitle the def......
-
Cox v. State
...degree. The Court of Criminal Appeals reversed his conviction and remanded his case to the circuit court for a new trial. Cox v. State, 629 So.2d 664 (Ala.Cr.App.1992). The Court of Criminal Appeals based its reversal on its holding that a clear violation of the principles of Batson v. Kent......