Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

08-3916 Mahaffey v. Ramos

By: dmc-admin//December 21, 2009//

08-3916 Mahaffey v. Ramos

By: dmc-admin//December 21, 2009//

Listen to this article

Criminal Procedure
Voir dire; equal protection

Where the prosecutor had race-neutral reasons for striking prospective jurors, the defendant's Batson challenge was properly denied.

"Mahaffey devotes most of the merits portions of his briefs in arguing that the prosecution's explanations are pretextual for four of the black jurors it dismissed (Mahaffey has abandoned any claims regarding the remaining three): Angela Mack, Nathaniel Howard, Bea Marshburn, and Catherine Taylor. The prosecutor offered the following race-neutral explanations for dismissing these four jurors: (1) Mack worked for a police department; (2) Howard would suffer hardship because he cared for his invalid mother-in-law, including lifting her from bed 'like a baby'; (3) Marshburn had a background in psychology; and (4) Taylor had poor communication skills. These race-neutral reasons are unquestionably valid. See Purkett v. Elem, 514 U.S. 765, 769 (1995) (finding the growing of long, unkempt hair a valid nondiscriminatory reason for dismissing a juror). So for Mahaffey to prove purposeful discrimination, he would need to show that the reasons were pretextual. Id. He seeks to show pretext first by showing disparate treatment, i.e., that the prosecution failed to peremptorily dismiss white jurors similarly situated to the four black jurors. See, e.g., Miller-El, 545 U.S. at 248 (finding pretext where the prosecution dismissed black juror, but not white jurors, who were ambivalent on imposing the death penalty). But Mahaffey fails on this score because he cannot show that any serving white juror was similarly situated to the four jurors whose dismissals he challenges. Specifically, he claims that one white juror was related to police department employees, not an actual police department employee like Mack, who would have developed personal preconceptions about how police reports should look. Mahaffey claims that another white juror shopped and shoveled snow for his elderly parents, not that he would suffer hardship from jury service comparable with Howard, who cared for an invalid. He claims that another white juror taught and coached special needs children, not had a background in psychology like Marshburn. Finally, he claims that other white jurors were similarly situated to Taylor, because they did not subscribe to periodicals. But the prosecution was entitled to credit additional factors beyond Taylor's non-subscription to periodicals, such as Taylor's monosyllabic responses to questions and the prosecutor's 'instincts,' Batson, 476 U.S. at 106 (Marshall, J., concurring), and 'experienced hunches and educated guesses,' J.E.B. v. Alabama ex re. T.B., 511 U.S. 127, 148 (1994) (O'Connor, J., concurring), in finding that Taylor lacked communications skills."

Affirmed.

08-3916 Mahaffey v. Ramos

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Zagel, J., Bauer, J.

Full Text

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests