Document: 405 U.S. 625 92 S.Ct. 1221 31 L.Ed.2d 536 Claude ALEXANDER, Petitioner,v.State of LOUISIANA. No. 70—5026. Argued Dec. 6 and 7, 1971. Decided April 3, 1972. Syllabus Petitioner, a Negro, attacks his rape conviction in Lafayette Parish, which was affirmed by the Louisiana Supreme Court, contending that grand jury selection procedures followed case were invidiously discriminatory against Negroes and, because statutory exemption provision, women. The commissioners (all white) sent out questionnaires (including space for racial designation) to those on list compiled from nonracial sources. Of 7,000-odd returns, 1,015 (14%) Negroes, though constituted 21% parish population presumptively eligible service. By means two culling-out procedures, when identifications had attached forms plainly visible, pool reduced 400, whom 27 (7%) group 20-man venires drawn. Petitioner's venire included one Negro (5%), indicted him none. There no evidence conscious commissioner testified race consideration. Held: 1. Petitioner made prima facie invidious discrimination him—not only statistical basis but showing not racially neutral—and State, did adequately explain disproportionately low number throughout process, meet burden rebutting presumption unconstitutionality used. Cf. Avery v. Georgia, 345 559, 73 891, 97 L.Ed. 1244; Whitus 385 545, 87 643, 17 599. Pp. 628—632. 2. contentions regarding women jurors are reached. 633 634. 255 La. 941, 233 So.2d reversed. Charles Stephen Ralston, New York City, petitioner. Bertrand De Blanc, Lafayette, La., respondent. Mr. Justice WHITE delivered opinion Court. 1 After trial District Court Fifteenth Judicial Louisiana, petitioner, convicted sentenced life imprisonment. His appeal Court,1 this granted certiorari.2 Prior trial, petitioner moved quash indictment (1) citizens token numbers, (2) female systematically excluded list, venire, impaneled jury.3 therefore argued invalid it returned up contrary requirements Equal Protection Clause Due Process Fourteenth Amendment. motions denied. 2 According 1960 census figures admitted into below, Parish contained 44,986 persons over 21 years age service;4 total, 9,473 (21.06%) Negro.5 At hearing petitioner's indictment, revealed commission consisted five members, all white, who been appointed court. names various sources (telephone directory, city voter registration rolls, lists prepared school board, themselves) determine qualified questionnaire indicate recipient. Through 7,374 returned, (13.76%) Negroes,6 each an information card designating, among other things, person, white slip indicating simply name address person. then culled about 5,000 questionnaires, ostensibly ground these service or exempted under state law. remaining 2,000 sets papers placed table, 400 selected, purportedly at random, box panels 20 Twenty-seven thus selected (6.75%).7 On drawn none 12 him, 20, Negro. 3 * For 90 years, has established criminal cannot stand Amendment if is based reason their race. Strauder West Virginia, 100 303, 25 664 (1880); Neal Delaware, 103 370, 26 567 (1881). Although defendant right demand members be indicts Virginia Rives, 313, 667 (1880), he entitled require State deliberately deny participate as administration justice.8 Ex parte 339, 676 Gibson Mississippi, 162 565, 16 904, 40 1075 (1896). Hernandez Texas, 347 475, 74 667, 98 866 (1954). It application settled principles issue here. 4 This where claimed there have called within last 30 Patton 332 463, 464, 68 184, 185, 76 (1947); chosen Pierre 306 354, 359, 59 536, 539 (1939); 'within memory witnesses lived (in area) lives,' Norris Alabama, 294 587, 591, 55 579, 581, 79 1074 (1935). Rather, argues that, case, consistent process progressive disproportionate reduction serve stage until ultimately all-white indict him. 5 In over, Use created possible 14% one-third black jurors. twice create prospective jurors, 7% Negro—a further one-half. percentage dropped 5% zero actually Against background, substantial disparity between proportion blacks duty raises strong inference chance produced result elementary probability make extremely unlikely random would, stage, so consistently Negroes.9 never announced mathematical standards demonstration 'systematic' exclusion has, rather, emphasized factual inquiry necessary takes account explanatory factors. decimation potential indeed striking here, we do rest our conclusion demonstrated improbability alone, themselves neutral. designation both provided clear easy opportunity discrimination. crucial steps final made, visible used commissioners, although consciously situation here similar 1244 (1953), sustained challenge array petit segregated tax lists. Juror cards lists, yellow being whites. Cards judge, specific held such unnecessary, however, given fact appeared jury: 'Obviously practice makes easier discriminate mind discriminate.' U.S., 562, S.Ct., 892. Again, 599 (1967), reversed tried before jury. Jurors one-volume digest divided separate sections whites; taxpayers also '(c)' after required Georgia law time. they aware appearing taxpayers; anyone race; knew personally; it. county 42% 27% county's 33 panel, three (9%) while 19-member Negro; 90-man seven Negros (8%), actual combination factors discrimination, mandated present case. 7 Once established, proof shifts rebut unconstitutional action permissible neutral criteria monochromatic result. Turner Fouche, 396 346, 361, 532, 540, 24 (1970); Eubanks 356 584, 78 970, 973, 991 (1958). carried case; explained elimination during selecting As supra, clerk court, member commission, consideration procedure. App. 34. squarely held, affirmations good faith making individual selections insufficient dispel systematic exclusion. 540; Jones 389 24, 25, 88 4, 5, 19 (1967); Sims 404, 407, 523, 525, 634 (1967). 'The bespeaks whether decision part any commissioner.' 482, 672. See 598, 583. clerk's testimony mailing not, itself, adequate State's proof, presented later stages process. event, 'not pursue course conduct office would operate grounds.' Hill 316 62 1159, 1161, 86 1559 (1942). Smith 311 128, 130, 61 164, 165, 85 84 (1940). Carter Jury Commission Greene County, 320, 330, 518, 549 (1970). We conclude, therefore, 'the (that said) record resorted commissioners.' 552, 647. II 8 challenges volunteer Article 402, La.Code Crim.Proc. claim novel urged male, finds support past cases. constitutional policy permitted defendants cases juries them. Also, groups arbitrarily afforded appropriate remedy. supra. But nothing adjudications suggesting himself denied equal protection alleged guarantees fair does States observe Fifth Amendment's provision presentment Duncan 391 145, 1444, 491 (1968), Sixth 'fundamental American scheme justice,' id., 149, 1447, rigth guaranteed courts Amendment, federal concepts 'grand jury,' binding obligatory States. Hurtado California, 110 516, 538, 111, 122, 28 232 (1884). 9 background set aside grounds, follow usual custom avoiding issues unnecessary us. Burton United States, 196 283, 295, 243, 245, 49 482 (1905). Ashwander Tennessee Valley Authority, 297 288, 346—348, 56 466, 482—483, 80 688 (1936) (Brandeis, J., concurring). may recharge properly return another again. Ballard 329 187, 196, 67 261, 265, 91 181 (1946). 10 Reversed. 11 POWELL REHNQUIST took DOUGLAS, concurring. 13 While I join Part Court's opinion, am convinced should reach constitutionality Louisiana's presented, thoroughly briefed argued, recurring importance. purports 'our custom' issues. sole rationale, questions dimension. could just well say deciding excluding renders question 14 can admits 'easier' analysis. sit decide 'easy' questions. And even faced with 'hard' questions, often decided alternate grounds dispositive. See, e.g., Dunn Blumstein, 995, 274. 15 complains Conceivably, complained several minority groups. Would relegated suffer repetitive re-indictment re-conviction court considered lawsuit? believe time come reject dictum 310, 664, 'may confine' 'to males.' reserved Hoyt Florida, 368 57, 60, 82 159, 161, 118, hold Art. Crim.Proc.,1 applied exclude class violated Alexander's impartial representative cross-section community.2 irrelevant analysis Alexander composition procedure must administer system consonantly Federal Constitution. asserts, 'federal concepts' obligate cites 232. Ante, 633. supports proposition. That merely requirement said obtain once chooses provide jury, directed speak subject. again, regardless freedom offenses punishable less than six months' imprisonment, Baldwin York, 399 66, 1886, 437, 'Once juries, constitutionally so, hew . .' 549.3 furthermore criteri(on)' community. speaking Commission, when, quoting 84, defined 'a body truly community.' 524. Brown Allen, 344 443, 474, 397, 416, 469: 'Our protect rights mean impose states conception proper source long reasonably reflects suitable character intelligence civic duty.' (Emphasis supplied.) Black said, 358, 83 757: 'Indictment Grand cease harmonize traditional justice very moment particular groups, classes races service.' (Footnote omitted.) 18 reflect community occurs jurisprudence: tradition connection either civil proceedings, necessarily contemplates 84; Glasser 315 85, 457, 471, 680.' Thiel Southern Pacific Co., 328 217, 220, 66 984, 985, 1181. Accord, Williams 78, 100, 1893, 1905, 446; Witherspoon Illinois, 510, 520, 1770, 1776, 776; 192—193, 263—264, 181; Labat Bennett, Cir., 365 F.2d 698, 722—724.4 precisely infirmity statute. 'It male panel will included. thought tend influence same men personality, economic status—and sex. Yet enough sitting neither act nor class. Men likewise But, shoe foot, intentionally panel? truth sexes fungible; excusively different composed both; subtle interplay imponderables. To insulate courtroom iota difference. flavor, distinct quality lost sex excluded. true excluded.' 193—194, 264. supplied; footnotes omitted). 22 us, moreover, indisputably reveals operated respect chosen. returns residents, single some 11,000 woman. done deliberately.5 23 relies automatic grants upheld 118. Hoyt, good-faith efforts include despite unless volunteered Id., 69, 166 (Warren, C.J., concurring opinion). Here, hand, feeblest interest service,6 woman filled questionnaire.7 This, 45,000 adults, 52% female. absolute State,8 betrays view woman's role withstand scrutiny modern standards. denying law, solely Bradwell Wall. 442. rationale underlying 402 Code articulated Bradley Bradwell: 'Man is, be, protector defender. natural timidity delicacy belongs evidently unfits many occupations life. constitution family organization, founded divine ordinance, nature indicates domestic sphere domain functions womanhood. harmony, identity, interests views belong, institution repugnant idea adopting independent career her husband. '. paramount destiny mission fulfil noble benign offices wife mother. Creator. rules society adapted general upon exceptional cases.' 141—142. Classifications longer insulated judicial legislative judgment 'woman's place home,' 'nature' ill-suited task. Reed Reed, 404 71, 251, 225. underpins issue.9 Insofar embodies discredited stereotype, firmly disapproved.10 Johnston & Knapp, Sex Discrimination Law: A Study Perspective, 46 N.Y.U.L.Rev. 675, 708—721 (1971). says, totally service; volunteer. asserts impractical affirmatively large numbers so. argument misses point. Neither man expected 64—65, 164. L. Kanowitz, Women Law (1969). Thus, exemption, coupled failure apprise volunteer, results total all. 29 Some violations due excused context error shown effect outcome. Giglio 150, 763, 104; Napue 360 264, 272, 1173, 1178, 1217. trivialized imposed: 'We measure accurately prejudice certain types people panel. Such subtle, intangible, escapes ordinary methods proof. absent another; gradually silently erode becomes evident. real meaningful purposes. If impartially violated, vindicate violation yet put tangible appearance. Otherwise irretrievably welter evidentiary rules.' Fay 300, 1613, 1634, 2043 (Murphy, dissenting). produce scheme. White Crook, 251 F.Supp. 401, 408—409 (MD Ala.1966). reasons, Crim.Proc., unconstitutional. 891 aggravated rape, 12-member unanimously verdict 'Guilty without Capital Punishment.' 401 936, 946, 215 apply essentially however. 538 539, 757 (1939). generally qualifications person citizen resided least year prior service, old, able read, write, English language, '(n)ot interdiction, incapable serving juror mental physical infirmity,' felony, felony pardoned.' Testimony motion 40,896 registered voters parish. 17,803 males, 16,483 females; 3,573 3,037 females. 38. One hundred eighty-nine designation. 15. inconsistencies group. introduced certification stating four shown. count shows 16—24. Section 1875 Civil Rights Act, Stat. 336, now codified U.S.C. § affirms reinforces right: 'No possessing prescribed shall disqualified race, color, previous condition servitude; whoever, officer charged summoning excludes fails summon cause, fined more $5,000.' take note, 552 n. 2, 647, technique calculating probability, chances 400-member 20,000. Brief 18. Crim.Proc.: 'A she previously filed resides written declaration desire subject challenging females rolls significance, rests, principles, matter what arose Clause, concerned instant accused's 379 546, 424. most articulating cross section supervisory power courts. 1181; 680. detail written, obligation guidelines system. principle federalism greater latitude fashioning jury-selection avoid designed 469; 322, 333, 519, 549. LeBlanc, indictment: 'A. slips mailed out. 'Q. Now, to? How determined? registrar voter's telephone book, submitted board find think got (sic) mixed way other. Was all? received ladies. one. Did you mail them? didn't women.' 35, 53. effort whatsoever expended encourage statement LeBlanc 'discussed Assistant Attorney,' 'sent women's clubs possibility jury.' 54. He averred 'we're working submit intention serve.' Ibid. 'As indicated men, resulted 7,000 responses. LeBlanc. nn. 5—6, No prohibits altogether, Alabama's prohibition having found Most afford treatment women, exemptions frequently pregnant children home. Five allow sex, request Ga.Code Ann. 59—124 (1965); Mo.Const., I, 22(b); N.Y. Judiciary 507(7), McKinney's Consol.Laws, c. (1968); R.I.Gen.Laws 9—9—11 Tenn.Code 22—101, 22—108 (1955). Perhaps purest articulation objection Judge Turner, dissenting Rosencrantz Territory, Wash.Ter. 267, P. 305 (1884), challenged married living husbands. rejected Turner's dissent: weaker call them regarded days Blackstone; theory day, unfitted characteristics assume perform political duties obligations citizenship, exploded advanced ideas nineteenth century. true. honors I. None witnessed cheerfully improvement laws particularly whereby disabilities day removed them, personal property footing men. say, wish see liability obligation, right. woman, accept secure maintain rights. were, stifle expression repugnance feel seeing associations exposed influences which, however others regard it, must, my shock blunt fine sensibilities, possession chiefest charm, religion countries, civilized semi-civilized, sacred 'If competent juror, competent. try more; suggest shocking possibilities wives, mothers, sisters, daughters .. These observations, pertinent What law? 'I concerning important incidents are, express common men.' 278—279, P., 309 310. 2043, approving Relying proposition that: 'Until recently, nearly half-century adopted, universal juries,' opined 'woman become textual customary land crime free lagged behind personally desirable recognizing adn womanhood.' 289—290, 1628—1629. holding York's special 'blue-ribbon' stated flatly show 278, 1622. Indeed, 'nose-counting' approach led refusal recognize 'part land' course, undermined subsequent events. 8, suggested itself overruled 491. 185 1468, text following (Harlan, little left Duncan, like obsolete square reality. '(The Fay) calls mind—in its reliance historical justification discrimination—the observation attitudes formidable arguments.' 715 Emery, 224 N.C. 601, S.E.2d 858, 871 (1944) (Seawell, Resencrantz supra (Turner,

Category: 1