The Third Circuit previously granted relief to persons convicted of murder in Philadelphia after ruling that Philadelphia prosecutors had illegally excluded African Americans from juries.
However, in this Abu-Jamal case ruling, the court found no fault in evidence of exclusion of African Americans from the jury in his 1982 trial.
Curiously, the evidence of exclusion at Abu-Jamal’s trial is of equal or greater magnitude than proof of exclusion previously found acceptable for relief by the Third Circuit.
These previous rulings on jury discrimination formed the precedent on that issue for the Third Circuit.
That precedent stated it is wrong for prosecutors to discriminate against even one black potential juror. Additionally, that precedent stated defendants did not have to object to jury selection discrimination by prosecutors immediately when it occurred.
Yet, this ruling reversed precedent on those two points of legal procedure.
A week before this Abu-Jamal ruling, the US Supreme Court granted relief to a death row inmate in Louisiana because of a discriminatory jury selection process. That Supreme Court ruling was written by a Justice on that court who formerly served on the Third Circuit.
That Justice, Samuel Alito, had approved relief to Philadelphia murder defendants due to discriminatory jury selection practices by prosecutors. Alito, in a February 2005 Third Circuit ruling, stated prosecutors commit a violation by removing “any black juror because” of their race – a position similar to the position contained in that recent US Supreme Court ruling he authored.
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).