Title: Bell v. State

State: alabama

Issuer: Alabama Supreme Court

Document:

535 So. 2d 210 (1988)
Ex parte State of Alabama.
(In re: Gary Lamar BELL
v.
STATE of Alabama).
87-547.

Supreme Court of Alabama.
September 9, 1988.
Don Siegelman, Atty. Gen., and Beth Slate Poe, Asst. Atty. Gen., for petitioner.
Greg Ward, Lanett, for respondent.
PER CURIAM.
We granted the State's petition for a writ of certiorari to consider whether *211 the defendant's Batson[1] objection was timely. The Court of Criminal Appeals, holding that it was, remanded the case for further proceedings. See Bell v. State, 535 So. 2d 208 (Ala.Crim.App.1987). The record clearly shows, however, that the defendant's objection to the venire was made after the jury had been empaneled and sworn. The record reveals the following:
The Court of Criminal Appeals has held that such an objection is untimely if made after the jury has been sworn to hear the case. See Williams v. State, 530 So. 2d 881 (Ala.Crim.App.1988), and the cases cited therein. We agree with the Court of Criminal Appeals that, in order to preserve the issue for appellate review, a Batson objection, in a case in which the death penalty has not been imposed, must be made prior to the jury's being sworn. We hold, therefore, that the defendant's objection came too late in this case; the judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals must be reversed and the case remanded to that court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.[2]
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
TORBERT, C.J., and MADDOX, ALMON, SHORES, BEATTY, ADAMS, HOUSTON and STEAGALL, JJ., concur.
[1]  Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 106 S. Ct. 1712, 90 L. Ed. 2d 69 (1986).
[2]  We do not understand the Court of Criminal Appeals' reliance on Levert v. State, 512 So. 2d 790 (Ala.Crim.App.1987). It appears to us that in that case the defendant objected to the venire prior to the swearing of the jury.