Court Opinion

ID: 9623745
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 06:42:41.16443+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:05:34.465037
License: Public Domain

Ruffin,
Presiding Judge, concurring and concurring specially.
I concur fully in all that is said in the majority’s opinion. The vile circumstances of this case, however, lead me to write separately.
Appellate review is always dominated by a sense of compelling urgency. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the criminal context, where life and liberty are the highest stakes. Appellate judges must, with surgeon-like precision, ascertain whether error was committed during trial. Due process requires a fair trial, “regardless of the heinousness of the crime charged, the apparent guilt of the offender or the station in life which he occupies.”1
The crimes in this case constitute the ultimate villainy. Motivated by racial animus, Fulcher and others targeted the victim based solely on the color of his skin. Many of us retain a distant, but vivid, memory of what was, and what never again should ever be, prevalent behavior in this country. Nevertheless, both history and the law demand that we give this case no less or greater scrutiny, simply because the facts reflect racial animus. The majority opinion properly scrutinized and rejected each of the legal arguments raised by Fulcher. Accordingly, I fully concur.
I am authorized to state that Judge Barnes joins in this special concurrence.

 Irvin v. Dowd, 366 U S. 717, 722 (81 SC 1639, 6 LE2d 751) (1961).