State v. McCollum, S91A0310
| Decision Date | 23 November 1992 |
| Docket Number | No. S91A0310,S91A0310 |
| Citation | 262 Ga. 554,422 S.E.2d 866 |
| Parties | The STATE v. McCOLLUM et al. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Dougherty County Superior Trial Judge: Asa D. Kelley, Jr.
Michael J. Bowers, Atty. Gen., Harrison W. Kohler, Sr. Asst. Atty. Gen., State Law Dept., Atlanta, for the State.
Robert H. Revell, Jr., Jesse W. Walters, Perry, Walters & Lippitt, Albany, for McCollum.
Robert E. Wilson, Dist. Atty., Decatur, amicus curiae.
Kermit S. Dorough, Jr., Dorough & Sizemore, Albany.
Donald F. Samuel, Garland & Samuel, P.C., Atlanta.
John R. Martin, Martin Brothers, P.C., Atlanta.
In State v. McCollum, 261 Ga. 473, 405 S.E.2d 688 (1991), a majority of this court affirmed the trial court's decision refusing to prohibit the defendants in the action below from exercising their peremptory strikes in a racially discriminatory manner. The Supreme Court of the United States reversed that decision, holding that:
[T]he Constitution [of the United States] 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.
Georgia v. McCollum, 505 U.S. 42, ----, 112 S.Ct. 2348, 2359, 120 L.Ed.2d 33 (1992).
In accordance to the mandate of the Supreme Court of the United States, the former judgment of this court in the case is vacated and the decision of the trial court is reversed. Direction is given to the trial court to proceed consistent with the opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States.
Judgment reversed with direction.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Bell
...this issue is not before us. 6. In Georgia v. McCollum, 505 U.S. 42, 59, 112 S.Ct. 2348, 120 L.Ed.2d 33 (1992), on remand 262 Ga. 554, 422 S.E.2d 866 (1992), the United States Supreme Court extended the Batson rule to govern the conduct of criminal defendants ("the Constitution prohibits a ......
-
People v. Bell
...marks and brackets omitted]); Georgia v. McCollum, 505 U.S. 42, 49-50, 112 S.Ct. 2348, 120 L.Ed.2d 33 (1992), on remand 262 Ga. 554, 422 S.E.2d 866 (1992) ("Be it at the hands of the State or the defense, if a court allows jurors to be excluded because of group bias, it is a willing partici......
-
Ellerbee v. State
...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 members of one race in the exercise of his peremp......
-
Jury Selection and Voir Dire
...discrimination in the exercise of peremptory challenges. Georgia McCollum, 505 U.S. 42, 112 S.Ct. 2348, 120 L.Ed.2d 33 (1992), on remand 422 S.E.2d 866. The Court found that the harms discussed in Batson are also inflicted by a defendant’s racially discriminatory use of peremptory challenge......
-
Jury Selection and Voir Dire
...discrimination in the exercise of peremptory challenges. Georgia McCollum, 505 U.S. 42, 112 S.Ct. 2348, 120 L.Ed.2d 33 (1992), on remand 422 S.E.2d 866. The Court found that the harms discussed in Batson are also inflicted by a defendant’s racially discriminatory use of peremptory challenge......
-
Jury Selection and Voir Dire
...discrimination in the exercise of peremptory challenges. Georgia McCollum, 505 U.S. 42, 112 S.Ct. 2348, 120 L.Ed.2d 33 (1992), on remand 422 S.E.2d 866. The Court found that the harms discussed in Batson are also inflicted by a defendant’s racially discriminatory use of peremptory challenge......
-
Jury selection and voir dire
...discrimination in the exercise of peremptory challenges. Georgia McCollum, 505 U.S. 42, 112 S.Ct. 2348, 120 L.Ed.2d 33 (1992), on remand 422 S.E.2d 866. The Court found that the harms discussed in Batson are also inflicted by a defendant’s racially discriminatory use of peremptory challenge......