Prima Facie Case Study

1950 Words8 Pages
II. THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS AND EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAW WERE VIOLATED BECAUSE THE LOWER TRIBUNAL ALLOWED PEREMPTORY CHALLENGES BASED ON RACIAL AND GENDER GROUNDS.

The constitutional rights of Mr. Blake, due process and equal protection under the law, were violated when the trial Judge erred in permitting the State Attorney to raise peremptory challenges based on racial and gender grounds and failed to make the Neil inquiry. The constitution of the United States under U.S. Const. amend. XIV, § 1, establishes that “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process
…show more content…
Louisiana, 405 U.S. 625, 631-32 (1972).
In order for Mr. Blake to establish a prima facie case of purposeful discrimination in the selection of the jury, Mr. Blake can base this “solely on evidence concerning the prosecutor 's exercise of peremptory challenges at the defendant 's trial.” Batson, 476 U.S. at 96.
In Miami v. Cornett, 463 So. 2d 399 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985) this Court used the test previously established in State v. Neil, 457 So. 2d 481 (Fla. 1984) which furthers the right to a fair and impartial trial. Nevertheless, since them, because trial courts had difficulty applying the Neil test, the Supreme Court of Florida introduced variations to step one through three of the test, and the current version of the test is as follows:

"A party objecting to the other side 's use of a peremptory challenge on racial grounds must: a) make a timely objection on that basis, b) show that the venireperson is a member of a distinct racial group, and c) request that the court ask the striking party its reason for the strike. If these initial requirements are met (step 1), the court must ask the proponent of the strike to explain the reason for the
Open Document