United States v. Rutledge
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 16322
| 7th Cir. | 2011Background
- Rutledge was tried for federal offenses; during voir dire the prosecutor struck the only two African-American veniremembers, Powell and Martin, with peremptory challenges.
- Rutledge’s counsel objected under Batson v. Kentucky (three-step framework) alleging discriminatory strikes.
- The district court denied the Batson challenge, stating the government’s reasons were nonracial but provided no explicit credibility finding at Batson step three.
- Powell expressed concern about being heard and respected as an African-American juror; Martin showed no questions and appeared agitated, yet race-neutral reasons were advanced for both strikes.
- The court repeatedly labeled the reasons as nonracial but did not articulate a credibility assessment of the prosecutor’s explanations.
- Rutledge was convicted; this court remands to the district court to make explicit step-three credibility findings or vacate the conviction if not credible.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Must district court make explicit step-three credibility findings? | Rutledge | Rutledge | Remand required for explicit credibility findings |
| Are the prosecutor’s race-neutral explanations credible or pretextual where based on demeanor? | Rutledge | Rutledge | Record insufficient; credibility findings needed on demeanor-based reasons |
| May the district court rely on absence of explicit findings to deny Batson without further development? | Rutledge | Rutledge | Remand to develop explicit credibility determinations |
Key Cases Cited
- Snyder v. Louisiana, 552 U.S. 472 (U.S. 2008) (requires credibility determinations when demeanor is involved in Batson)
- Purkett v. Elem, 514 U.S. 765 (U.S. 1995) (step-two allows broad race-neutral explanations; step-three must assess credibility)
- Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322 (U.S. 2003) (credibility of race-neutral explanations evaluated at step three)
- Miller-El v. Dretke, 545 U.S. 231 (U.S. 2005) (Miller-El II; holistically evaluate credibility of explanations)
- McMath v. United States, 559 F.3d 657 (7th Cir. 2009) (remand for explicit step-three credibility findings when record silent)
- Taylor v. United States, 509 F.3d 839 (7th Cir. 2007) (remand where district court lacked necessary findings)
- McCann v. United States, 484 F.3d 459 (7th Cir. 2007) (emphasizes importance of credibility assessment at Batson step three)
- Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Servs., 523 U.S. 75 (U.S. 1998) (rejects conclusive presumption that same-race individuals cannot discriminate)
- Castaneda v. Partida, 430 U.S. 482 (U.S. 1977) (rejects racial presumptions about group members' attitudes)
- Powers v. Ohio, 499 U.S. 400 (U.S. 1991) (race-based conclusions cannot substitute for individualized credibility)