United States v. Taylor
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 4621
| 7th Cir. | 2011Background
- Taylor and Thomas were charged with murder and armed robbery in Hammond, Indiana; the government sought the death penalty for both.
- During voir dire the prosecutor struck several African-American jurors with peremptory challenges; Watson was the key juror challenged.
- Watson indicated she could not impose the death penalty on a non-shooter, and would follow the law as instructed; the district court denied a strike for cause and the peremptory strike removed Watson.
- The defense challenged the Watson strike under Batson; initial responses led to remands for credibility determinations
- On remand the district court accepted seven new, nonracial reasons for striking Watson, and the court reaffirmed the strike after evaluating these reasons.
- On appeal, this court vacated and remanded, holding the remand exceeded Miller-El II guidance by evaluating new, unrelated reasons and requiring a decision on the original reason; court vacated the judgments and remanded for a new trial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether remand permitted consideration of new reasons beyond the original justification | Taylor argues the remand expanded to new justifications. | United States contends the expanded rationale supported credibility. | Remand exceeded Miller-El II; invalid for Batson review. |
| Whether Miller-El II requires limiting analysis to the initial reason for strike | Taylor asserts only initial reason should be evaluated. | United States asserts post hoc reasons may be considered. | Court vacates and remands for new trial; must limit to initial rationale. |
Key Cases Cited
- Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (U.S. 1986) (prohibition on race-based peremptory strikes)
- Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322 (U.S. 2003) (trial court must assess credibility of race-neutral reasons)
- Miller-El II, 545 U.S. 231 (U.S. 2005) (prosecutor must stand or fall on initial reasons; avoid afterthoughts)
- Holloway v. Horn, 355 F.3d 707 (3d Cir. 2004) (review focused on whether new reasons were pretextual)
- Hendrix, 509 F.3d 362 (7th Cir. 2007) (add-on race-neutral reasons must be present at initial challenge)