Document: 429 U.S. 122 97 S.Ct. 399 50 L.Ed.2d 339 Curfew DAVISv.State of GEORGIA. No. 76-5403. Dec. 6, 1976. PER CURIAM. 1 The petitioner in this case was convicted murder and sentenced to death after trial by a jury selected violation the standards enunciated Witherspoon v. Illinois, 391 510, 88 1770, 20 776 (1968), applied Boulden Holman, 394 478, 89 1138, 22 433 (1969), Maxwell Bishop, 398 262, 90 1578, 26 221 (1970). held that "a sentence cannot be carried out if imposed or recommended it chosen excluding veniremen for cause simply because they voiced general objections penalty expressed conscientious religious scruples against its infliction." U.S., at 522, S.Ct., 1777. 2 Supreme Court Georgia found one prospective juror had been excluded standard. court nevertheless affirmed conviction sentence, reasoning erroneous exclusion death-scrupled did not deny representing cross section community since other jurors sharing attitude were excused cause: "The rationale progeny is violated where merely qualified class group shown, as here, others such serve. This record completely void any evidence systematic intentional so appellant community." 236 Ga. 804, 809-810, 225 S.E.2d 241, 244-245. 3 (1, 2) That, however, test established Witherspoon, has subsequent cases improper member venire. See Wigglesworth Ohio, 403 947, 91 2284, 29 857 (1971), rev'g 18 Ohio St.2d 171, 248 N.E.2d 607 (1969); Harris Texas, 2291, 859 457 S.W.2d 903 (Ct.Crim.App.Tex.1970); Adams Washington, 2273, 855 76 Wash.2d 650, 458 P.2d 558 (1969). Unless venireman "irrevocably committed, before begun, vote regardless facts circumstances might emerge course proceedings," 522 n. 21, 1777, he excluded; improperly even though subsequently stand. 4 Accordingly, motion leave proceed forma pauperis petition certiorari are granted, judgment reversed, remanded further proceedings inconsistent with opinion. 5 It ordered. 6 Mr. Justice REHNQUIST, whom THE CHIEF JUSTICE BLACKMUN join, dissenting. 7 As clear from most cursory reading, does inexorably lead result now reaches. Indeed, much language opinion would support reasoning, result, reached Georgia. extension cover sole deserves plenary consideration, per se rule precludes application harmless-error Chapman California, 386 18, 87 824, 17 705 (1967). There no indication wrong when observed "record community," 245. 8 is, moreover, unclear whether State entitled another peremptory challenge,* surely decide presence unexercised challenges render harmless limited number veniremen. Finally, defect she irrevocably opposed penalty; rather, failure question sufficiently determine opposed. inconceivable hearing could conducted finish aborted questioning have, fact, excludable cause. 9 effects arguably exclusion, short, too murky warrant summary reversal imposed. Since I do believe controlled our past decisions, grant set argument. * Normally, defense, capital case, challenges, one-half many defense. Ga.Code Ann. § 59-805 (1965). In transcript reveals defense utilized 21 challenges; State, 10.

Category: 0