232 So.3d 117
Miss.2016Background
- HAS Electrical sued Hemphill Construction for breach of a subcontract and sought ~ $570,000; Hemphill counterclaimed for ~$23,677.04. Trial proceeded to a jury.
- During jury selection, each side had four peremptory strikes. Hemphill struck Juror 7 (black male) and Juror 13 (black male); HAS objected under Batson as racially discriminatory.
- Hemphill offered race-neutral reasons: for Juror 7—age (preferred not to have an older jury); for Juror 13—employment with a temporary-employment company (possible bias on employment issues).
- The trial court asked for race-neutral reasons but concluded there was no pattern of discrimination and ultimately sustained both strikes; HAS preserved Batson objections and appealed.
- Jury returned verdict for Hemphill on claims and counterclaim; trial court awarded Hemphill $90,000 in attorneys’ fees. On appeal, the Supreme Court of Mississippi limited its present review to Batson issues.
- The Court found the Batson hearing for Juror 7 was incomplete (trial court treated pattern rather than pretext inquiry as dispositive) and remanded solely for a limited Batson step-three hearing as to Juror 7; it upheld the strike as to Juror 13 because HAS offered no rebuttal at trial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (HAS) | Defendant's Argument (Hemphill) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court properly conducted Batson analysis for peremptory strikes | HAS says court failed step-three review for Juror 7—court required pattern rather than permitting rebuttal on pretext; requests new trial | Hemphill says it offered race-neutral reasons (age; temporary employment); court correctly accepted them where no prima facie pattern shown or no rebuttal | Remanded for limited Batson hearing on Juror 7 to test whether age was pretext; strike of Juror 13 upheld because HAS failed to rebut at trial |
| Whether a single strike requires Batson protection or proof of a pattern | HAS contends one strike can establish purposeful discrimination if pretext shown | Hemphill contends absence of an overall pattern negates Batson burden | Court reiterates a pattern is not required; a single discriminatory strike suffices if pretext proven |
| Scope of remand: may parties present new reasons or evidence | HAS contends full reexamination of both strikes is warranted; dissent urges broader review | Hemphill implicitly seeks limiting remand to original record and Juror 7 only | Court limits remand to Juror 7, bars Hemphill from offering any new race-neutral reason, and confines parties to the original record; retains jurisdiction for review of certified results |
| Whether trial court’s deference absolves errors in Batson procedure | HAS argues trial-court deference cannot substitute for required three-step Batson analysis | Hemphill and trial court relied on credibility/deference to accept reasons without full step-three analysis | Court stresses necessity of completing Batson steps; defers to trial-court credibility when procedure is properly followed but remands where step-three was not conducted |
Key Cases Cited
- Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (establishing three-step framework prohibiting race-based peremptory strikes)
- Hernandez v. New York, 500 U.S. 352 (reasoning that once proffered, prima facie inquiry is moot and analysis proceeds to offered reasons)
- Snyder v. Louisiana, 552 U.S. 472 (trial court must consider all circumstances and related strikes in assessing pretext and credibility)
- Hardison v. State, 94 So. 3d 1092 (Miss.) (discussing acceptable race-neutral reasons and requirement to proceed to step three)
- Berry v. State, 802 So. 2d 1033 (Miss.) (deference to trial court credibility findings in Batson determinations)
- McGee v. State, 953 So. 2d 211 (Miss.) (single instance of purposeful discrimination can suffice to prove discriminatory purpose)
- Pitchford v. State, 45 So. 3d 216 (Miss.) (describing Batson’s three-step analysis)