The jury selection process in the Karmelo Anthony murder trial has become a focal point of controversy due to the exclusion of Black prospective jurors. This development has prompted legal observers to question the efficacy of constitutional safeguards against discrimination when juror strikes are justified by purportedly race-neutral explanations.
Jury selection continued Friday in Yolo County Superior Court for the retrial of Carlos Reales Dominguez, with legal counsel probing prospective jurors on their media exposure, cannabis use, mental health perspectives, and capacity to evaluate expert testimony in a case centered on an insanity defense.
Jury selection commenced Friday in Yolo County Superior Court for the retrial of Carlos Reales Dominguez, the former UC Davis student charged in the 2023 Davis stabbings that resulted in two fatalities and one injury. Proceedings focused on seating jurors in advance of opening statements scheduled for May 26.
The Batson v. Kentucky ruling, which prohibits prosecutors from rejecting potential jurors based on race, has not been successful in preventing racially biased jury selection, as evidenced by the Innocence Project’s research and cases of wrongful convictions and executions of Black individuals.
The Supreme Court case of Pitchford v. Cain raises concerns about the ability of federal courts to meaningfully review claims of racial discrimination in criminal trials, as the case highlights the procedural barriers of modern post-conviction review and the difficulty of applying the Batson principle in practice.
The practice of “death qualification” allows prosecutors to dismiss potential jurors who oppose the death penalty, raising concerns about fairness, racial exclusion and the integrity of capital juries.
The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments on March 31 in the long-running Mississippi case of Pitchford v. Cain to determine whether the accused was improperly denied the right to challenge alleged racial discrimination in jury selection.
A coalition of prosecutors, law enforcement leaders and former judges has filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court, urging it to take a firmer stand against racial discrimination in jury selection and warning that weak enforcement of constitutional safeguards threatens the legitimacy of the justice system nationwide.
The U.S. Supreme Court is reviewing Pitchford v. Cain, a case involving allegations of racial discrimination in jury selection by former Mississippi District Attorney Doug Evans, whose conduct was previously condemned in Flowers v. Mississippi (2019).
The U.S. Supreme Court will consider whether to hear Pitchford v. Cain, a case raising allegations of racial discrimination in jury selection, which echoes the Court’s 2019 ruling in Flowers v. Mississippi and could have far-reaching implications for the enforcement of equal protection in jury selection.
WOODLAND, CA – Prosecution, defense and the judge agreed this week at the trial-readiness conference for accused…
WOODLAND, CA – A multi-defendant trial in Yolo County Superior Court faced further delay this week after…
MONTGOMERY, AL- The Equal Justice Initiative’s report, Unreliable Verdicts: Racial Bias and Wrongful Convictions, details the ongoing…
By David M. Greenwald Executive Editor Oakland, CA – Local justice leaders gathered Tuesday in front of…
Death qualification goes hand in hand with mass incarceration and the racial bias embedded in our criminal…
By Gracy Joslin and Fiona Davis WOODLAND, CA – In Yolo County Superior Court Monday morning, just…
By Anna Olsen and Lamiya Gulamhusein ALAMEDA, CA – During a Monday morning jury selection hearing here…
By Anna Olsen ALAMEDA, CA – Lying under oath, circumstantial evidence and prejudice were among the concepts…
By Catherine Potente and Fiona Davis WOODLAND, CA – A judge Monday here in Yolo County Superior…
By Anna Olsen ALAMEDA, CA – During jury selection here in Alameda County Superior Court Tuesday potential…