State v. Carr, S91A1595
| Decision Date | 17 March 1993 |
| Docket Number | No. S91A1595,S91A1595 |
| Citation | 427 S.E.2d 273,262 Ga. 893 |
| Parties | STATE v. CARR. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Jefferson County Superior Trial Judge: Marvin B. Hartley, Jr.
Richard A. Malone, Dist. Atty., William Steven Askew, Asst. Dist. Atty., Swainsboro, for the State.
Michael J. Moses, Louisville, for Carr.
Bruce Maloy, Maloy & Jenkins, Mary Erickson, Atlanta, for other interested parties.
In State v. Carr, 261 Ga. 845, 413 S.E.2d 192 (1992), we affirmed the denial of the State's motion, made pursuant to Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986), to require the defendant, an African-American, to articulate race-neutral reasons for using fifteen peremptory strikes to remove fifteen white persons from the jury. 1 In doing so, we relied on our decision in State v. McCollum, 261 Ga. 473, 405 S.E.2d 688 (1991).
Subsequently, the United States Supreme Court reversed McCollum. See Georgia v. McCollum, 505 U.S. 42, 112 S.Ct. 2348, 120 L.Ed.2d 33 (1992). That court also granted certiorari to State v. Carr, and remanded Carr to us to consider in light of its decision in Georgia v. McCollum. 506 U.S. 801, 113 S.Ct. 30, 121 L.Ed.2d 3.
In Georgia v. McCollum, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the United States Constitution prohibits a criminal defendant from exercising his or her peremptory strikes in a purposeful, racially discriminatory manner. The Court concluded that if the State makes a prima facie showing of racial discrimination, the defendant will be required to articulate racially neutral explanations for the exercise of his or her peremptory strikes. Id., 505 U.S. at ----, 112 S.Ct. at 2359.
We therefore vacate the judgment of this court in this case, and reverse the decision of the trial court. The case is remanded to the trial court to conduct further proceedings in a manner consistent with Georgia v. McCollum, supra.
Judgment reversed.
All the Justices concur.
1 The resulting jury consisted of eleven African-Americans and one Latino.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Williams v. State
...(1991 Supp.).3 Ind.Code § 35-50-2-9(b)(1)(G) (1991 Supp.).4 Ind.Code § 35-50-2-9(b)(8) (1991 Supp.).5 See also Georgia v. Carr, 262 Ga. 893, 427 S.E.2d 273 (1993) (per curiam ) (after cert. granted and remand, 506 U.S. 801, 113 S.Ct. 30, 121 L.Ed.2d 3 (1992)), where the Georgia Supreme Cour......
-
Ellerbee v. State
...of Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 apply equally to the defense as to the prosecution. State v. Carr, 262 Ga. 893, 427 S.E.2d 273; see State v. McCollum, 262 Ga. 554, 422 S.E.2d 866. " '[W]here (, as here,) a [defense counsel] has disproportionately struck mem......
-
Adams v. State
...jurors on the basis of race, his assertion of prejudice is without foundation because such strikes are forbidden. State v. Carr, 262 Ga. 893, 427 S.E.2d 273 (1993). We find no abuse in the trial court's denial of additional jury 6. All three appellants made pretrial statements. Those statem......
-
Jackson v. State
...may not engage in "purposeful discrimination on the ground of race in the exercise of peremptory challenges." See State v. Carr, 262 Ga. 893, 427 S.E.2d 273 (1993). Jackson offered explanations for each of the first seven potential jurors he excused. Respecting five of the individuals excus......