Case ID: so2d_612/html/1312-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PATTERSON, Presiding Judge,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

W.A. TAYLOR, Jr., alias v. STATE.
    CR-91-378.
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    Sept. 30, 1992.
    Rehearing Denied Nov. 25, 1992.
    Certiorari Denied Feb. 19, 1993 Alabama Supreme Court 1920423.
    Richard D. Horne, Mobile, for appellant.
    James H. Evans, Atty. Gen., and James B. Prude, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
   ON RETURN TO REMAND

PATTERSON, Presiding Judge,

This court remanded this cause to the trial court to hold a hearing pursuant to Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986), because the appellant’s trial counsel was ineffective for failing to raise a Batson claim at trial. See Taylor v. State, 598 So.2d 1056 (Ala.Cr.App.1992). In lieu of a hearing, the appellant and the state entered into a stipulation of fact, adopted by the trial court, which reads, in pertinent part, as follows:

“3. The State of Alabama and the Appellant, W.A. Taylor, Jr. stipulate and agree that if a hearing were held the State of Alabama could satisfy the Court by providing race neutral reasons for the State’s strikes of jurors 4, [O.S.]; 17, [J.L.B.]; 28, [W.J.]. The State of Alabama and the Appellant, W.A. Taylor, Jr., stipulate and agree that if a hearing were held the State of Alabama could not provide race neutral reasons as required by Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 [106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69] (1986), for jurors 10, [R.R.J; 11, [T.J.J; 19, [H.J.B.J; [and] 21, [S.K.] of its peremptory strikes in selection of the jury in this matter.” (emphasis added).

Because the failure to provide a race-neutral reason for the strike of one black veniremember mandates the reversal of a case, see Ex parte Bird, 594 So.2d 676, 683 (Ala.1991) (“one unconstitutional peremptory strike requires reversal and a new trial”), the judgment is reversed, and the cause is remanded for a new trial.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

All Judges concur.