Supreme Court Rules Judge Need Not See Juror Demeanor to Rule on Batson Claim
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled a trial judge does not need to observe a potential juror to decide a prosecutor’s claim that he used a peremptory strike to dismiss the woman because of her demeanor.
The defense had argued the prosecutor dismissed the potential juror because of her race. The opinion (PDF) in Thaler v. Haynes is one of two summary opinions issued today, bringing to eleven the number of summary decisions issued this term, SCOTUSblog reports.
Two judges presided at different stages of the case, the Supreme Court said in the per curiam decision. The prosecutor claimed he had dismissed the juror because her demeanor had been “somewhat humorous” and not “serious” and her “body language” had belied her “true feeling.” The second judge in the case rejected the defense lawyer’s claim that the true motive for the dismissal was because the potential juror was African-American.
A federal appeals court granted a new trial, citing two Supreme Court decisions, including Batson v. Kentucky, which had held that prosecutors may not make peremptory challenges that are based on race.
In today’s ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court said those two decisions did not require judges to reject demeanor-based explanations when they did not personally observe the potential juror.
“Neither of these cases held that a demeanor-based explanation for a peremptory challenge must be rejected unless the judge personally observed and recalls the relevant aspect of the prospective juror’s demeanor,” the Supreme Court said.
Additional coverage:
Associated Press: “Court reverses lower decision on new trial for man accused of killing Texas police officer”
