Parker v. State
Decision Date | 16 March 1990 |
Docket Number | 3 Div. 976 |
Citation | 568 So.2d 335 |
Parties | William Dean PARKER v. STATE. |
Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
John Oliver Cameron, Montgomery, for appellant.
Don Siegelman, Atty. Gen., and Norbert H. Williams, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
William Dean Parker was convicted for robbery in the first degree and sentenced to 20 years' imprisonment. That conviction is reversed because of the prosecutor's racial discrimination in the selection of the jury in violation of Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986), and Ex parte Branch, 526 So.2d 609 (Ala.1987).
The prosecutor used 6 of his 8 peremptory strikes to remove blacks from the jury venire. After the defendant objected, the trial judge required the prosecutor to state his reasons for the strikes. We find one of those reasons insufficient.
That reason appears in the record as follows:
We find that this does not constitute a racially-neutral reason.
A prosecutor may not use peremptory jury strikes in a racially discriminatory manner. Batson, supra. The principles of Batson, as interpreted by the Alabama Supreme Court, are set out in Ex parte Branch, supra, and Harrell v. State, 555 So.2d 263 (Ala.1989), and need not be restated here.
In Branch, 526 So.2d at 624, our Supreme Court stated "Other than reasons that are obviously contrived, the following are illustrative of the types of evidence that can be used to show sham or pretext:
"Group-based" strikes without "examination of [the] juror apparent in the record to determine any further information about the juror and the juror's competency to serve" caused our Supreme Court "great concern." Branch, 526 So.2d at 626 n. 13.
The actual voir dire of the jury venire is not contained in the record before this Court. However, the record does include the which reveals that the State requested the trial judge to ask the venire 5 short questions which have absolutely no connection with the explanation given for striking Juror No. 92. Avery v. State, 545 So.2d 123, 127 (Ala.Cr.App.1988).
The comments this Court made in Williams v. State, 548 So.2d 501, 508 (Ala.Cr.App.1988), are relevant and of equal application in this case:
This Court is acutely aware of the fact that an appellate court may reverse a trial judge's determination that the prosecution's peremptory challenges were not motivated by intentional discrimination only if that determination is clearly erroneous. Branch, 526 So.2d at 625. Yet, if Batson and Branch are to have any meaning, this Court must reverse where its independent review convinces it that a clear abuse of discretion is present. Our Supreme Court has warned that "[i]n...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Ex parte Bird
...the defendants point out, this issue has reached the appellate level in a number of cases from Montgomery County. See Parker v. State, 568 So.2d 335 (Ala.Crim.App.1990); Wagner v. State, 555 So.2d 1141 (Ala.Crim.App.1989); Leonard v. State, 551 So.2d 1143 (Ala.Crim.App.1989); Powell v. Stat......
-
Engberg v. Meyer
...273 Cal.Rptr. 537, 797 P.2d 561 (1990), cert. denied 500 U.S. 948, 111 S.Ct. 2249, 114 L.Ed.2d 490 (1991) and then Parker v. State, 568 So.2d 335, 339 (Ala.Cr.App.1990); State v. Hall, 244 Mont. 161, 797 P.2d 183 (1990); Melson, 556 A.2d 836 and State v. Kinsey, 797 P.2d 424 (Utah App.), ce......
-
Freeman v. State
...reasons for exercising several of her 14 strikes used to strike 14 of the 16 black veniremembers were not race-neutral); Parker v. State, 568 So.2d 335 (Ala.Cr.App.1990) (wherein the court held that in 1 of the 6 strikes he exercised against blacks (out of a total of 8 strikes), an assistan......
-
Maddox v. State
...be someone who would [sic]." Voir dire cannot assume bias or partiality on the part of the struck juror. See generally, Parker v. State, 568 So.2d 335 (Ala.Cr.App.1990) (speculative for the State to assume bias or partiality on the part of the struck veniremember). Furthermore, where as her......