Document: 497 U.S. 543 110 S.Ct. 2995 111 L.Ed.2d 439 Horacio ALVARADOv.UNITED STATES. No. 89-6985. June 25, 1990. PER CURIAM. 1 At his criminal trial, petitioner claimed that the Government used certain peremptory challenges to remove black jurors solely on grounds of race, contrary Batson v. Kentucky, 476 79, 106 1712, 90 69 (1986). The District Court accepted Government's explanations for its challenges, and was convicted. He pursued claim in Appeals, claiming were pretextual. asserted had not made out a prima facie error it race-neutral reasons each challenge. Appeals did rule these competing claims, held no appellate inquiry required into merits if jury finally chosen represented fair cross section community, as this jury. conviction affirmed. 891 F.2d 439. 2 Petitioner, seeking certiorari, urges relied an erroneous ground rejecting claim. United States agrees erred holding long petit satisfied Sixth Amendment's fair-cross-section concept, need inquire prosecution stricken purely racial grounds. That holding, states, is also discredited by our decision Holland Illinois, 493 474, 803, 107 905 (1990), which requirement Amendment apply handed down after issued opinion below. us deny however, because failed make case intentional discrimination given reach. 3 When has suggested been court below, unusual grant vacate judgment direct reconsideration light representations Court. See, e.g., Biddle States, 484 1054, 108 1004, 98 971 (1988); Malone 919, 278, 239 (1987). Nor novel do so where conceded but there another below could be affirmed brought here. Indeed, decided earlier Term presented such situation and, without dissent, we vacated position Chappell 494 1075, 1800, 931 (1990). This appropriate course follow case. If rested improvident ground, suggests, should first instance pass adequacy exercising challenges. 4 Consequently, motion leave proceed forma pauperis petition writ certiorari are granted. vacated, remanded Second Circuit further consideration brief filed May 21, 5 It ordered. 6 Chief Justice REHNQUIST, with whom O'CONNOR, SCALIA, KENNEDY join, dissenting. 7 I have previously expressed my doubt wisdom automatically vacating favorable when confesses See Mariscal 449 405, 406, 101 909, 909-10, 66 616 (1981) (dissenting opinion). Today carries unfortunate practice new lengths: confessed case, instead taken correct denied. 8 opposition contains following statement: 9 "Although petitioner's lacks merit, agree appeals' analysis departed from general approach selection marked Batson." Brief Opposition 12. 10 seizes upon concession "analysis" may wrong justification judgment. But entire thrust result reached correct. 11 A confession at least deliberate part concede favor wrong. In present only above-quoted statement opposing certiorari. now judgments basis what essentially observations about "approach" particular fear find future briefs much less explicit frank than they past. Since depend heavily deciding whether cases party, will loser result.

Category: 0