 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Manning v. State3/31/1999
ts burden of showing sufficient race-neutral explanations for its strikes. Woodward, 1997 WL 776557 at *5. On appeal the trial court's fact-finding regarding the bases for peremptory strikes is accorded great deference, because it is largely based on credibility. Lockett v. State, 517 So. 2d 1346, 1349 (Miss. 1987). "'Great deference' has been defined in the Batson context as insulating from appellate reversal any trial findings which are not clearly erroneous." Id. at 1349-50 (citations omitted). If the defendant makes no rebuttal, the trial Judge may base his decision solely on the reasons given by the State. Bush v. State, 585 So. 2d 1262, 1268 (Miss. 1991).
. "It is incumbent upon a defendant claiming that proffered reasons are pretextual to raise the argument before the trial court. The failure to do so constitutes waiver." Mack v. State, 650 So. 2d 1289, 1297 (Miss. 1994) (citation omitted). In this case, Manning only offered rebuttal to the prosecution's race-neutral reasons for striking Jurors Cynthia Purnell and Uyless Gray, Jr. Defense attorney Williamson disputed the prosecution's basis for striking Cynthia Purnell regarding her views on the death penalty, because the court had previously denied the State's challenge for cause against Ms. Purnell on that basis, and because she stated during individual voir dire that she could follow the law and the court's instructions. "A peremptory challenge does not have to be supported by the same degree of justification required for a challenge for cause." Stewart v. State, 662 So. 2d 552, 558 (Miss. 1995). Although the trial Judge was able to sufficiently rehabilitate Ms. Purnell as a juror for purposes of denying the State's challenge for cause, her statements that she strongly disagrees with the death penalty and would be partial toward imposing a life sentence were a sufficient race-neutral basis for upholding the peremptory strike against her. Furthermore, the State's other reason for striking Ms. Purnell, her prior history of writing bad checks, has been approved by this Court as a proper race-neutral reason. Mack, 650 So. 2d at 1299-1300.
. Manning also attempted to rebut the State's rationale for striking Uyless Gray, Jr. based upon his reluctance to be a juror. During voir dire, Mr. Gray expressed concern about being sequestered, because he was scheduled to attend annual training at Camp Shelby. Judge Montgomery assured Mr. Gray that, as the State Judge Advocate, he would be able to make arrangements for Mr. Gray to be late for training. The prosecutor also offered as a race-neutral reason his own oversight in failing to voir dire Mr. Gray about his juror questionnaire response that he was unsure of his ability to ever vote for the death penalty. Defense attorney Mark Williamson objected to the State's proffered race-neutral explanations because of the court's reassurance to Mr. Gray that his scheduled training could be worked out, and because having no opinion on the death penalty "is not one way or the other." Again, it is unnecessary for a peremptory strike to meet the same standard as a challenge for cause. Stewart, 662 So. 2d at 558. While the trial court had no reason to excuse Mr. Gray due to his scheduled training at Camp Shelby, the prosecutor may still have had a lingering doubt as to Mr. Gray's willingness to serve on the jury. A juror's reluctance to serve or preoccupation with matters outside the courtroom is a valid race-neutral reason for purposes of Batson. Walker v. State, 671 So. 2d 581, 627-28 (Miss. 1995). Furthermore, while it is true that having no opinion about the death penalty may not be a legitimate justification, having doubts as to one's ability to follow the law and vote for the death penalty when appropriate is
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Mississippi DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|