Court Opinion

ID: 9774935
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 18:38:39.362004+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:32:17.976843
License: Public Domain

MALONEY, Judge,
dissenting.
To remand this case or any case originally tried in 1984 back for a Batson hearing to test the motives of the prosecution as they existed eight years ago is asking for inventive reasoning that could border on inadvertent manufacture. In this case, the defendant presented a pre-trial motion requesting that the Court order the prosecution not to utilize its preemptory challenges “based on race”. This motion was denied by the trial court and the record reflects that the state used its preemptory challenges to strike all the qualified black members of the venire.
Despite defendant’s request made at the time of trial that the State place in the record its reasons for exercise of such preemptory challenges, the trial court did not require the State to do so.
I would reverse and remand this case for a new trial and respectfully dissent because this court does not do so.