Harrell v. State

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
Writing for the CourtHOUSTON; HORNSBY
Citation571 So.2d 1270
PartiesEx parte State of Alabama. (Re Joe Louis HARRELL v. STATE of Alabama). 89-1472.
Decision Date30 November 1990

Page 1270

571 So.2d 1270
Ex parte State of Alabama.
(Re Joe Louis HARRELL
v.
STATE of Alabama).
89-1472.
Supreme Court of Alabama.
Nov. 30, 1990.

Page 1271

Don Siegelman, Atty. Gen., and Joseph G.L. Marston III, Asst. Atty. Gen., for petitioner.

Paul D. Brown, Mobile, for respondent.

HOUSTON, Justice.

This is the second time that this case has been before this Court on certiorari review. The defendant, Joe Louis Harrell, was convicted in Mobile Circuit Court of possession of cocaine and other offenses. Harrell challenged his conviction in the Court of Criminal Appeals, based upon the rule of law stated in Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986). The Court of Criminal Appeals remanded the case with instructions for the trial court to determine whether the guidelines of Batson, as interpreted by this Court in Ex parte Branch, 526 So.2d 609 (Ala.1987), had been followed. See Harrell v. State, 555 So.2d 257 (Ala.Crim.App.1989). The State petitioned for a writ of certiorari, which we granted pursuant to Rule 39, A.R.App.P., and we affirmed the judgment remanding the case for a Batson hearing. See Harrell v. State, 555 So.2d 263 (Ala.1989).

On remand, the trial court determined that Harrell had made a prima facie showing of purposeful discrimination on the part of the prosecutor in selecting the jury and that the prosecutor had failed to present race-neutral reasons for challenging 5 of the 10 black jurors on the venire. On return to remand, the Court of Criminal Appeals vacated Harrell's conviction and remanded the case for a new trial. 571 So.2d 1269. The case is once again before this Court on certiorari review, pursuant to a petition filed by the State in which it argues that the following undisputed facts established, as a matter of law, that the prosecutor did not engage in purposeful discrimination when she struck the blacks from the jury venire: 1) The lawfully established venire consisted of 28 people, of whom 10 (35.7%) were black; 2) the prosecutor used 5 of her 8 peremptory challenges to strike blacks and the remaining 3 to strike whites; 3) defense counsel used all 8 of his peremptory challenges to strike whites from the venire; and 4) the jury that was ultimately empanelled consisted of 5 blacks, amounting to 41.7% of the jury (a greater percentage than was on the lawfully established venire), and 7 whites.

If these were the only facts Harrell relied on to raise an inference of discrimination, we...

To continue reading

Request your trial
102 practice notes
  • Ex parte Thomas
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • September 2, 1994
    ...sat on the jury than sat on the lawfully established venire, an inference of discrimination has not been created." Harrell v. State, 571 So.2d 1270, 1271 (Ala.1990), cert. denied, 499 Page 4 U.S. 984, 111 S.Ct. 1641, 113 L.Ed.2d 736 (1990). Or, as Thomas phrases the issue, may a defendant m......
  • Ex parte Windsor, 1931643.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • October 18, 1996
    ...on the venire. We also stated: "We emphasize that our disapproval of the construction that has been given Harrell II Harrell v. State, 571 So.2d 1270 (Ala.1990), does not mean that an increased percentage of blacks on the jury can never be a circumstance to be considered in ruling whether a......
  • Bush v. State, No. CR-03-1902 (Ala. Crim. App. 5/29/2009), No. CR-03-1902.
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • May 29, 2009
    ...476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986),] claim on direct appeal from the judgment of conviction based on Harrell [v. State, 571 So. 2d 1270 (Ala.1990)], which was our most current interpretation of what federal constitutional law required at the time. "`The United States Supreme ......
  • Perkins v. Dunn, CASE NO. 7:14-CV-1814-SLB
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 11th Circuit. United States District Court of Northern District of Alabama
    • September 19, 2019
    ...In Harrell v. State, 555 So. 2d 263, 268 (Ala. 1989), on return to remand, 571 So. 2d 1269 (Ala. Cr. App.), writ quashed, 571 So. 2d 1270 (Ala. 1990), cert. denied, 499 U.S. 984, 111 S. Ct. 1641, 113 L. Ed. 2d 736 (1991), the Alabama Supreme Court stated:"The defendant may not prove his pri......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
102 cases
  • Ex parte Thomas
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • September 2, 1994
    ...sat on the jury than sat on the lawfully established venire, an inference of discrimination has not been created." Harrell v. State, 571 So.2d 1270, 1271 (Ala.1990), cert. denied, 499 Page 4 U.S. 984, 111 S.Ct. 1641, 113 L.Ed.2d 736 (1990). Or, as Thomas phrases the issue, may a defendant m......
  • Ex parte Windsor, 1931643.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • October 18, 1996
    ...on the venire. We also stated: "We emphasize that our disapproval of the construction that has been given Harrell II Harrell v. State, 571 So.2d 1270 (Ala.1990), does not mean that an increased percentage of blacks on the jury can never be a circumstance to be considered in ruling whether a......
  • Bush v. State, No. CR-03-1902 (Ala. Crim. App. 5/29/2009), No. CR-03-1902.
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • May 29, 2009
    ...476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986),] claim on direct appeal from the judgment of conviction based on Harrell [v. State, 571 So. 2d 1270 (Ala.1990)], which was our most current interpretation of what federal constitutional law required at the time. "`The United States Supreme ......
  • Perkins v. Dunn, CASE NO. 7:14-CV-1814-SLB
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 11th Circuit. United States District Court of Northern District of Alabama
    • September 19, 2019
    ...In Harrell v. State, 555 So. 2d 263, 268 (Ala. 1989), on return to remand, 571 So. 2d 1269 (Ala. Cr. App.), writ quashed, 571 So. 2d 1270 (Ala. 1990), cert. denied, 499 U.S. 984, 111 S. Ct. 1641, 113 L. Ed. 2d 736 (1991), the Alabama Supreme Court stated:"The defendant may not prove his pri......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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