Court Opinion

ID: 9769816
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 15:02:40.283572+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:31:08.315835
License: Public Domain

OVERSTREET, Judge,
concurring.
Because the court of appeals did not have the benefit of Purkett v. Elem, 514 U.S. 765, 115 S.Ct. 1769, 131 L.Ed.2d 834 (1995), I agree that remand to that court is not inappropriate. However, I do not believe that the court of appeals was necessarily incorrect in its analysis as was done or that this remand can be interpreted to imply such. I simply have no disagreement with remanding for reconsideration in light of the subsequent Purkett opinion, with the understanding that Purkett does not mandate that the trial court accept the Raison-challenged party’s facially raceneutral explanation, or that the appellate court affirm the trial court’s acceptance of such explanation. Some facially race-neutral explanations are simply beyond rational acceptance; and of course the trial court is in the best position to make that determination. Nevertheless, the trial court’s decision thereon is still subject to appellate review.
With these comments I join Judge Wom-ack’s opinion of the Court.