Court Opinion

ID: 9655047
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 18:58:51.64977+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:13:15.770299
License: Public Domain

ON APPELLANT’S MOTION FOR REHEARING
McDonald, judge.
Appellant ably urges in his motion for rehearing and in oral argument that this court erred in holding that the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States in Avery v. Georgia, supra, and in Williams v. Georgia, supra, do not control in the instant case for the reason that no actual discrimination was shown by the record.
Appellant takes the position that the United States Supreme Court’s decision in the Avery case, as explained in the Williams decision, means that the danger of discrimination inherent in the system of jury selection which was struck down in the Avery case is present in this case.
We feel that a correct disposition was made of the instant case in our original opinion. We here reiterate what was stated *201in that opinion: “* * * we have concluded that a denial of equal protection has not been shown,” and further conclude that the facts in the case at bar refute the presence of any discrimination in jury selection.
Appellant vigorously urges that discrimination does not have to be shown, but that where there could be a danger of discrimination the decision in Avery controls.
We feel that this appellant’s rights were fully safeguarded, not only because of the lack of any showing on his part that he was discriminated against but, further, that there was not present —as disclosed by the proceedings in the instant case— any actual or apparent discrimination.
We find no merit in any of the other contentions advanced by appellant’s able counsel.
The motion for rehearing is overruled.