Foster v. Chatman
136 S. Ct. 1737
| SCOTUS | 2016Background
- Timothy Foster was convicted of capital murder in Georgia (1987) and sentenced to death; prosecutors used peremptory strikes to remove all qualified black prospective jurors from the venire.
- Foster raised a Batson claim at trial and on direct appeal; Georgia courts rejected the claim and the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari in 1989.
- While pursuing state habeas relief, Foster obtained portions of the prosecution's jury-selection file under Georgia's Open Records Act; the file included highlighted venire lists (black jurors marked), a "definite NO's" list with five black names, notes referencing "No Black Church," and other annotations.
- The state habeas court admitted the file but denied relief, treating the claim as largely barred by Georgia res judicata doctrine while also analyzing Batson on the merits; the Georgia Supreme Court denied a Certificate of Probable Cause.
- The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari, held that the state-law res judicata bar was not independent of the federal Batson question, reviewed the Batson third-step deference question, and concluded the prosecution's strikes of Marilyn Garrett and Eddie Hood were motivated in substantial part by race.
- The Court reversed the Georgia Supreme Court's order and remanded for proceedings consistent with its opinion; Justice Alito concurred in the judgment (discussing state-law remand issues); Justice Thomas dissented (arguing lack of jurisdiction and undue second-guessing of trial-court credibility findings).
Issues
| Issue | Foster's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Court has jurisdiction despite Georgia's res judicata ruling | Georgia's res judicata application depended on the merits of the Batson claim, so federal review is permitted | Georgia's denial of a Certificate of Probable Cause forecloses federal review as a state-law procedural bar | Court: jurisdiction exists because the state court's res judicata application was not independent of federal law; review allowed |
| Whether prosecutors' peremptory strikes violated Batson | New prosecution-file evidence (highlights, "definite NO's", race markings, notes) plus inconsistencies show strikes were race-motivated | The file provenance is uncertain and some reasons proffered were race-neutral; prosecutors denied making markings | Court: considering totality of circumstances, strikes of Garrett and Hood were motivated in substantial part by race; Batson violation established |
| Weight and provenance of prosecution-file materials | Documents were from the DA's office and must be considered; authorship uncertainties only affect probative weight | Many notes' authorship/timing unknown; without prosecutor testimony their meaning is speculative | Court: uncertainties do not negate probative value; reasonable to attribute the materials to DA's office and consider them as circumstantial evidence of racial intent |
| Remedy and role of state courts on remand | Relief is appropriate for Batson violation; state courts should apply their procedural rules consistent with federal ruling | State procedural rules (res judicata) may limit relief; Georgia courts should determine postremand state-law consequences | Court: reversed and remanded for proceedings consistent with opinion; left state-law res judicata application to Georgia courts (per concurrence) |
Key Cases Cited
- Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (establishing three-step framework for race-based peremptory strike challenges)
- Snyder v. Louisiana, 552 U.S. 472 (Batson requires consulting all circumstances bearing on racial animus; discrimination in a single strike forbidden)
- Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322 (credibility and comparison of similarly situated jurors can show purposeful discrimination)
- Miller-El v. Dretke, 545 U.S. 231 (disparate treatment of similarly situated nonblack jurors is evidence of pretext)
- Ake v. Oklahoma, 470 U.S. 68 (a state procedural bar that depends on federal constitutional ruling is not an independent state ground)
- Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp., 429 U.S. 252 (circumstantial evidence may show discriminatory intent)
- Hernandez v. New York, 500 U.S. 352 (deference to trial-court credibility in Batson challenges; decisive question is credibility of race-neutral explanation)
- Three Affiliated Tribes of Fort Berthold Reservation v. Wold Engineering, P.C., 467 U.S. 138 (when state-law determination is influenced by federal interpretation, review of the federal question is appropriate)