Document: 424 U.S. 589 96 S.Ct. 1017 47 L.Ed.2d 258 Theodore RISTAINO et al., Petitioners,v.James ROSS, Jr. No. 74-1216. Argued Dec. 8-9, 1975. Decided March 3, 1976. Syllabus Absent circumstances comparable in significance to those existing Ham v. South Carolina, 409 524, 93 848, 35 46, examination of veniremen during Voir dire about racial prejudice is Held not constitutionally required. In the instant case, which involved prosecution respondent, a Negro, for violent crimes against white security guard, respondent did show such circumstances. There was thus no error constitutional dimensions when state trial judge questioned general bias or but declined question them specifically prejudice. Pp. 594-598. 508 F.2d 754, reversed. Barbara A. H. Smith, Asst. Atty. Gen., Boston, Mass., petitioners. Michael G. West, Cambridge, respondent. Mr. Justice POWELL delivered opinion Court. 1 Respondent Negro convicted court guard. The denied respondent's motion that directed be asked voir addition customary questions narrow issue whether, under our recent decision 46 (1973), entitled require asking broader presented whether announced requirement applicable whenever there may confrontation criminal between persons different races ethnic origins. We answer both these negative. 2 * Respondent, James Ross, Jr., tried Massachusetts with two other Negroes armed robbery, assault and battery by means dangerous weapon, intent murder. victim alleged man employed Boston University as uniformed prospective jurors conducted court, required statute inquire generally into See n. Infra. Each defendant, represented separate counsel, made written also prejudice.1 defendant moved affiliations law enforcement agencies. 3 consulted counsel defendants their motions. After tentatively indicating he "(felt) purpose would accomplished this instance," invited e views counsel: 4 "THE COURT: . I thought from something Donnelly (counsel codefendant) said, might have wanted on record peculiar we are operating here perhaps didn't want say open court. 5 "Is anything it, Donnelly? 6 "MR. DONNELLY: No, just fact white, black. 7 This, unfortunately, problem us, all can hope pray take oaths seriously understand spirit oath what Court says Judge anyway am sure Judges time impress upon before, during, after trial, before verdict, it says, they decide case evidence, extraneous considerations. 8 "I believe best done respect problems regard extremely important ." App. 29-30. 9 Further discussion persuaded should because victim's status guard.2 But adhered his pose 10 five panels then commenced. briefly familiarized each panel facts omitting any reference matters. He explained clerk ask impartiality agencies.3 Consistently intention "impress (the jurors) considerations," preceded questioning an extended obligations jurors.4 remarks posed indicated panel. Panelists answering affirmatively were individually at bench judge, presence counsel. This procedure led excusing 18 cause grounds prejudice, including one panelist who admitted bias.5 11 jury eventually impaneled counts. On direct appeal Ross contended federal rights violated denial request contention rejected Supreme Judicial Massachusetts, Commonwealth 361 Mass. 665, 282 N.E.2d 70 (1972), sought writ certiorari. While petition pending, held court's failure had due process law. granted Ross' certiorari remanded reconsideration light Ham, 410 901, 968, 265 (1973); again affirmed conviction. 363 296 810 (1973). reasoned turned need its announce "a new broad principle requiring (such) put State trials black .." Id., 671, N.E.2d, 815. certiorari, denied. 414 1080, 94 599, 38 486 12 present renewed collateral attack habeas corpus. Relying District corpus, Appeals First Circuit affirmed. 754 (1974). assumed facts. involving "violence white" close police officer," specific similar Ham. 756. think read too broadly. II 13 Constitution does always entitle matters conceivably him. supra, U.S., 527-528, S.Ct., 850. "is supervision great deal must, necessity, left sound discretion." Connors United States, 158 408, 413, 15 951, 953, 39 L.Ed. 1033 (1895); see 850; Aldridge 283 308, 310, 51 470, 471, 75 1054 (1931). so "determination impartiality, demeanor plays part, particularly within province judge." Rideau Louisiana, 373 723, 733, 83 1417, 1423, 663 (1963) (Clark, J., dissenting). Thus, State's obligation impanel impartial jury6 satisfied less than inquiry feared defendant. 14 however, recognized some cases impermissible threat fair guaranteed refusal dire. Carolina courts possession marihuana. well known locale civil activist, defense officials framed him narcotics charge "get him" activities. Despite circumstances, Ham's court-conducted include prejudice.7 reversed judgment conviction "the essential fairness Due Process Clause Fourteenth Amendment requires shown (defendant) permitted interrogated (during ) bias." 527, By terms universal applicability.8 Rather, reflected assessment significant likelihood that, absent "indifferent (they stand) unsworne." Coke Littleton 155b (19th ed. 1832). approach consistent determinations failing jury. Irvin Dowd, 366 717, 81 1639, 751 (1961); supra; Turner 379 466, 85 546, (1965); cf. Avery Georgia, 345 559, 73 891, 97 1244 (1953). 16 strongly suggested been His prominence community if already veniremen, inevitably revealed members course presentation defense. Racial issues therefore inextricably bound up conduct trial. Further, reputation activist interposed likely intensify individual harbor. deemed included necessary meet impaneled. 17 do agree rose case.9 mere distort special factors officer, relied Appeals, cited respective primarily source aggravating factor, 2, dealt law-enforcement affiliations.10 suggest infect clear unable support concerning pointing existed others significance. acted determining demands could more generalized thorough veniremen. Accordingly, Reversed. 19 STEVENS took part consideration case. 20 WHITE concurs result ground rule applied retroactively occurred prior 21 MARSHALL, whom BRENNAN joins, dissenting. 22 1973, refused review affirmance 486. dissenting refusal, observed "(t)o deny (409 (1973)) stillborn write epitaph 'essential fairness' 40 years ago (V. (1931))." 1085, 602. Today, reversing Appeals' Court's grant emphatically confirms promises inherent will fulfilled. For reasons expressed my dissent earlier cannot join confirmation. respectfully dissent. proposed adopt own various codefendants, was: "5. Are you person telling truth person?" 23. only thing. make victim(')s being guard uniform acting policeman. NEWMAN Ross): factor series relatives policemen. going Newman's suggestion double here, skin color, someone quasi policeman, (a question) area relations 30-31. were, substance, following: "If related victim, interest formed sensible time. " presently, past worked department district attorney's office, relative engaged work." 71. first Mass.Gen.Laws Ann., c. 234, § 28 (1959). addressed follows: "(THE COURT:) (U)nder your oath, absolute duty render verdicts (Sic) based evidence hear courtroom, factors. "The Clerk giving opportunity inform Court, verdict case; serious doubt "Under question, asked, standing raising hand." 72. At least venireman knew Negroes. 42. member questioned, shows immediately stand "set bar tried." 39. It appears formality pursued Cf. 49-50, 73-74, 84, 97. Nothing lodged indicates Negroes, although presumably remained courtroom throughout questioning. A "impartial jury" Sixth States through Amendment. Duncan 391 145, 88 1444, 491 (1968). Principles guarantee See, E. g., 722, 1642, (1961). were: "1. Would fairly try basis disregarding defendant's race? "2. You negroes? Against people? influenced use term 'black'?" 525, 849, 2. defending argues sweeping Per se rule. where violence involved, motions race victim. adverse witnesses. Tr. Oral Arg. 29-34. note not, principle, limited possible apply equal force origins sought, logic encompass factors, religious affiliation national origin. 313, 472, heterogeneous society policy considerations militate divisive assumption justice turn pigmentation skin, accident birth, choice religion. 415, (1895). Although hold required, wiser propound appropriate designed identify requested Under supervisory power much faced here. supra ; Walker, 236 (CA9), cert. denied, 416 990, 2399, 768 (1974); Booker, 480 1310 (CA7 1973). free allow demanded Constitution. fact, has guidelines Lumley, 327 683 (Mass.1975); 673, 810, 816 resemble many respects Aldridge, overturned murder policeman venire finding "constitutional stature." 528, 851. relevant rely directly precedential force. noted "was expressly grounded requirement." 526, holding today, actual exercise over courts. 9, Supra.

Category: 0