Redman v. State

848 S.W.2d 716, 1993 Tex. App. LEXIS 406, 1993 WL 33058
CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedFebruary 8, 1993
DocketNo. 12-90-00132-CR
StatusPublished

This text of 848 S.W.2d 716 (Redman v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Redman v. State, 848 S.W.2d 716, 1993 Tex. App. LEXIS 406, 1993 WL 33058 (Tex. Ct. App. 1993).

Opinion

Opinion following Remand to Trial Court

ONION, Presiding Judge (Retired)1

On original submission, this Court, inter alia, remanded the cause to the trial court with instructions to conduct a Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986), hearing. That hearing has been conducted and the trial court has transmitted the record and its findings of facts and conclusions of law to this Court.

Thereafter, Appellant and the State were advised of their right to rebrief the Batson issue. See Robinson v. State, 790 S.W.2d 334, 335 (Tex.Cr.App.1990).

Appellant, in his supplemental brief, contends that the record following remand now shows a violation of the Batson rule that a prosecutor violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, United States Constitution, by challenging potential jurors solely on the basis of race. See Batson, 476 U.S. at 89, 106 S.Ct. at 1719; Tex.Code Crim.Proc.Ann. art. 35.261 (Vernon 1989). The State has filed no supplemental brief.

The trial court found that Appellant was black and that the State exercised peremptory challenges against prospective jurors, Webb and Carey, the only blacks on the jury panel. The trial court in effect con-[717]*717eluded that Appellant had established a prima facie showing of racial discrimination and that the State’s reasons for exercising its peremptory strikes against Webb and Carey “were not racially neutral as to the case on trial and were speculative in nature.” The record supports the trial court’s findings and conclusions. Appellant’s point of error following remand is sustained.

The judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded to the trial court.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Batson v. Kentucky
476 U.S. 79 (Supreme Court, 1986)
Robinson v. State
790 S.W.2d 334 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1990)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
848 S.W.2d 716, 1993 Tex. App. LEXIS 406, 1993 WL 33058, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/redman-v-state-texapp-1993.