Document: 385 U.S. 545 87 S.Ct. 643 17 L.Ed.2d 599 Phil WHITUS and Leon Davis, Petitioners,v.STATE OF GEORGIA. Petitioners, v. STATE Nos. 650 253. Argued Dec. 7, 1966. Decided Jan. 23, 1967. Charles Morgan, Jr., Atlanta, Ga., P. Walter Jones, Albany, for petitioners. Fred B. Hand, Pelham, E. Freeman Leverett, respondent. Mr. Justice CLARK delivered the opinion of Court. 1 Once again we are confronted with question racial discrimination in selection grand petit juries which have respectively indicted petitioners found them guilty offense murder. The claim is that Georgia's system jury resulted systematic exclusion Negroes from both its law required commissioners to select names prospective jurors books county tax receiver were maintained on a racially segregated basis. Ga.Code Ann. § 59—106. raised these cases consolidated argument do likewise disposition. 2 No. 253 an interlocutory appeal judgment denying petitioners' as them. Georgia authorizes such appeal, 6—701, it was first perfected Supreme Court transferred Appeals. That court affirmed denial discrimination. 112 Ga.App. 328, 145 S.E.2d 83. We granted certiorari. 384 1000, 86 1971, 16 1014 (1966). In view lack finality order this case, dismiss writ improvidently proceed dispose juries' questions 650. 3 Following affirmance by Appeals trial proceeded try merits. After challenge array denied, put convicted. affirmed. Whitus State, 222 Ga. 103, 149 130; Davis 114, 130. 813, 183, 54. find circumstances here, unexplained sufficient support claims reverse judgments. I. 4 been here twice before. They originally convicted 1960 216 110, 114 877; 284, 116 205, cert. 365 831, 81 718, 5 708 (1961). Thereafter habeas corpus filed United States District Southern which, time, petitioner attacked composition juries. dismissed Balkcom, Cir., 299 F.2d 844. On certiorari, vacated remanded case hearing 370 728, 82 1575, 8 803 (1962). remand, petition ground had waived since not courts. reversed, holding systematically excluded 333 496. Its ruling based finding 45% population Negro; yet, none ever served within memory witnesses. II. set aside convictions, ibid., Superior Mitchell County directed revise list. requires six appointed 'select upright intelligent citizens serve jurors, shall write persons so selected tickets.' also group number, exceeding two-fifths whole most experienced, intelligent, writing their other tickets. entire group, excepting those constitutes body traverse jurors. tickets placed deposited boxes entered minutes §§ 59—108, 59—109. veniremen drawn each term selected. 6 State admits prior 1965, return sheets furnished Revenue Department, 92—6302, white taxpayers yellow Negro taxpayers. 1964 digest, all digests 1964, made up returns. Furthermore, lists be digest. further 'revised' list serving selected, reference old list, condemned, prepared year. However, did use returns themselves, nor 1965 digest yet up. appears one volume but into two sections—one whose included designated '(c)' being opposite 92—6307. 7 three who appeared witnesses testified they aware letter (c) appearing after digest; never or anyone because race color; whom knew personally respective communities; there around 600 selected; themselves prepared, no designation upon it. III. For over fourscore years has federal statutory law, 18 Stat. 336 (1875), U.S.C. 243, applied through Equal Protection Clause Fourteenth Amendment, conviction cannot stand if indictment verdict reason race. Strauder West Virginia, 100 303, 25 L.Ed. 664 (1880); see Pierre Louisiana, 306 354, 59 536, 83 757 (1939). There controversy constitutional principle—the involved application facts disclosed record. It our province 'analyze appropriate enforcement right may assured,' Norris Alabama, 294 587, 590, 55 579, 580, 79 1074 (1935), while conclusions reached highest 'are entitled great respect * becomes solemn duty make independent inquiry determination disputed *.' supra, at 358, S.Ct., 539. burden is, course, prove existence purposeful discrimination, Tarrance Florida, 188 519, 23 402, 47 572 (1903). once prima facie out shifts prosecution. 9 undisputed personal acquaintance communities. admitted condemned illegal when reversed convictions. conceded 27.1% Negroes; 10,206 people age 21 years, 4,706 male,1 2,004, 42.6%, latter number 33 service during indicted, Negroes, actually 19 persons; venire 90 used tried petitioners, least seven and, accepted jury. 10 obvious under same previous digests, suffered deficiency. Indeed, employed procedure concedes trial. 11 believe proof constituted While rejected color held insufficient overcome case. 598, 583. insists revision evidence former practice irrelevant. seen, suspect. At roll specifically suspect prepared. reversing original 12 akin Avery Georgia, 345 559, 73 891, 97 1244 (1953). box colored Here be, was, Moreover, paper sheets. 'system selection' 'and resulting danger abuse struck down Williams 349 375, 382, 75 814, 819, 99 1161 (1955). Nor does fact basis correct evil. See Cassell Texas, 339 282, 289, 70 629, 632, 94 839 (1950). 13 Under opportunity present say record resorted commissioners. disparity between percentage (27.1%) (9.1%) (7.8%) strongly points conclusion.2 Although Appeals, offered testimony why continued retrial. explanation venires, although must large numbers 'upright intelligent' qualification required. any event failed offer indicating fully qualified. therefore, meet rebutting 14 contended reversal decision below should free rather than retried. This contention arises language expressed 'present period eight months will afford take necessary steps reindict retry petitioners.' F.2d, 510. theory provided eight-month remand new would beyond period. persuaded logic. proper disposition where state stated Hill 316 400, 406, 62 1159, 1162, 559 (1942): 15 'A prisoner need go he guilty, Texas indict him conforms requirements.' Patton Mississippi, 332 463, 469, 68 184, 187, 92 76 (1947); Eubanks 356 584, 589, 78 S.Ct 970, 974, 991 (1958). judgments are, proceedings inconsistent opinion. ordered. Reversed. Women, qualified serve, compelled excused request. 59—124. unnecessary instant interesting note 'probability' situation before indicate how many approximately names. One commissioner, however, said his best estimate 25% 30%, close proximity admittedly 1964. Assuming 27% mathematical probability having .000006. Finkelstein, Application Statistical Decision Theory Jury Discrimination Cases, 80 Harv.L.Rev. 338

Category: 1