187 So. 3d 79
La. Ct. App.2016Background
- Defendant Derrick A. Dotson was tried for forcible rape (convicted on one count; mistrial on another) and later adjudicated a third-felony habitual offender and resentenced to life without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension.
- The convictions arose from cold-case DNA matches: victims K.T. (1994) and H.B. (1996) were assaulted; DNA from both victims later matched Dotson via CODIS in 2010.
- At trial Dotson testified the sexual encounters with both women were consensual and denied committing forcible rape.
- During voir dire a prospective juror disclosed her mother had been raped and murdered and, when asked whether that would affect her impartiality, replied, “Yes, it might.” The court did not further question the juror on that answer.
- Defense counsel challenged the juror for cause; the trial court denied the challenge, defense used a peremptory to remove her and exhausted all peremptory strikes.
- On appeal the Fourth Circuit reversed, holding the trial court abused its discretion in denying the challenge for cause and that reversal was required because the defendant had exhausted his peremptory challenges.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court erred in denying challenge for cause to a juror who said her mother was raped and murdered and that it "might" affect her impartiality | The State argued the juror’s entire voir dire did not show bias and comparison to precedents supporting denial of cause challenges | Dotson argued the juror’s statement that her mother’s rape/murder "might" affect her impartiality established lack of impartiality and warranted a challenge for cause; further questioning never occurred | Court held the trial court abused its discretion in denying the challenge for cause; because Dotson exhausted peremptory strikes, prejudice was presumed and conviction was reversed and remanded |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Carmouche, 872 So.2d 1020 (La. 2004) (standard for challenge for cause and review of trial court discretion)
- State v. Robinson, 11 So.3d 613 (La. Ct. App. 2009) (voir dire in entirety did not show bias where juror had crime-victim family members)
- State v. Holmes, 619 So.2d 761 (La. Ct. App. 1993) (prospective juror whose relative’s similar trauma affected impartiality required exclusion for cause)
- State v. Dorsey, 74 So.3d 603 (La. 2011) (presumption of prejudice when challenge for cause erroneously denied and defendant exhausts peremptory challenges)