Ex parte Pilot

Decision Date23 October 1992
Citation607 So.2d 311
PartiesEx parte Daniel Amos PILOT. (Re Daniel Amos Pilot, v. State). 1911116.
CourtAlabama Supreme Court

Petition for writ of Certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals (CR 90-370). Appeal from the Mobile Circuit Court, No. CC-90-1530, Ferrill D. McRae, Judge.

Jim Zeigler, Mobile, for petitioner.

James H. Evans, Atty. Gen., and Ed Carnes, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Chris N. Galanos, Dist. Atty., Mobile, for respondent.

MADDOX, Justice.

The issue presented by this petition for the writ of certiorari is whether the standard of Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986), applies to a defendant in a criminal case. The Court of Criminal Appeals held that it does. 607 So.2d 306. Because the United States Supreme Court has recently answered this question in the affirmative, we affirm.

On June 18, 1992, the day after we granted review in this case, the United States Supreme Court released Georgia v. McCollum, 505 U.S. 42, 112 S.Ct. 2348, 120 L.Ed.2d 33 (1992). In McCollum, the Court, faced with the identical issue, held:

"[T]he Constitution prohibits a criminal defendant from engaging in purposeful discrimination on the ground of race in the exercise of peremptory challenges. Accordingly, if the State demonstrates a prima facie case of racial discrimination by the defendants, the defendants must articulate a racially neutral explanation for peremptory challenges."

505 U.S. at ----, 112 S.Ct. at 2359, 120 L.Ed.2d at 51.

McCollum forecloses Pilot's argument and requires that we affirm the judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals.

AFFIRMED.

HORNSBY, C.J., and SHORES, HOUSTON and KENNEDY, JJ., concur.

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Maples v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 26 Marzo 1999
    ... ... However, it will weigh against any claim of prejudice. Ex parte Kennedy, 472 So.2d 1106 (Ala.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 975, 106 S.Ct. 340, 88 L.Ed.2d 325 (1985). Rule 45A, Ala. R.App. P., provides: ... "In all ... State, 47 Ala.App. 363, 254 So.2d 434, cert. denied, 287 Ala. 729, 254 So.2d 443 (1971) ). See also Pilot v. State, 607 So.2d 306 (Ala.Cr.App.), aff'd, 607 So.2d 311 (Ala.1992) ...         During voir dire examination, both the district ... ...
  • Travis v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 18 Abril 1997
    ... ... Ex parte Allred, 393 So.2d 1030 (Ala.1980) ... An indictment must allege all the elements of the offense charged and must also sufficiently apprise the accused ... 363, 254 So.2d 434, cert. denied, 287 Ala. 729, 254 So.2d 443 (1971) ); Langham v. State, 494 So.2d 910 (Ala.Crim.App.1986) ." Pilot v. State, 607 So.2d 306, 308 (Ala.Cr.App.1992), aff'd, 607 So.2d 311 (Ala.1992) ...          V ...         Relying on ... ...
  • State v. Govan, 23964
    • United States
    • South Carolina Supreme Court
    • 5 Octubre 1993
    ... ... Accord Ex parte Pilot, 607 So.2d 311 (Ala.1992) (affirming Pilot v. State, 607 So.2d 306 (Ala.Cr.App.1992)); State v. Carr, 262 Ga. 893, 427 S.E.2d 273 (1993); ... ...

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT