Opinion ID: 1850292
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: did the trial judge err by requiring griffin to justify his use of peremptory challenges on racially neutral grounds and by reinstating jurors after they were stricken peremptorily by the defendant?

Text: Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986), requires that when prosecutors exercise peremptory challenges against members of a distinct racial group, the state must advance articulable and racially neutral reasons for doing so. On appeal, Griffin stands by his previous contention that the Batson rule does not apply to a defendant's peremptory challenges. The United States Supreme Court recently held in Georgia v. McCollum, ___ U.S. ___, 112 S.Ct. 2348, 120 L.Ed.2d 33 (1992), that Batson applies to both prosecutors and defendants. The Court stated: Regardless of who invokes the discriminatory challenge, there can be no doubt that the harm is the same  in all cases, the juror is subjected to open and public racial discrimination... . We therefore reaffirm today that the exercise of a peremptory challenge must not be based on either the race of the juror or the racial stereotypes held by the party. McCollum takes the wind out of Griffin's sails, essentially holding that what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. The assignment of error is wholly without merit.