Zackery v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

Zackery v. State

521 So. 2d 1, 1987 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 5637, 1987 WL 483

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

DecidedJune 9, 1987

Docket7 Div. 308

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 521 So. 2d 1 (Zackery v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Zackery v. State, 521 So. 2d 1, 1987 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 5637, 1987 WL 483 (Ala. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinions

McMILLAN, Judge.

The Alabama Supreme Court, 521 So.2d 1, remanded this cause on the authority of Ex parte Jackson, 516 So.2d 768 (Ala.1986). This case is hereby remanded to the trial court to give the district attorney an opportunity to come forward with race-neutral explanations for his use of peremptory strikes. If he is unable to do so and the trial court determines that the facts establish a prima facie case of purposeful discrimination, Zackery is entitled to a new trial. See Owens v. State, [Ms. 85-1008, January 9, 1987] (Ala.1987).

REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.

All the Judges concur.

ON RETURN TO REMAND

Following a hearing, the trial court has determined that a prima facie case of purposeful discrimination was established as to the prosecutor’s use of peremptory strikes in excluding all of the blacks on the [2]*2venire from jury service. The appellant is therefore entitled to a new trial. Jurisdiction of this cause is remanded to the circuit court. This appeal is moot and is, therefore, dismissed.

OPINION EXTENDED; APPEAL DISMISSED.

All the Judges concur.

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

McMILLAN, Judge.

The Alabama Supreme Court, 521 So.2d 1, remanded this cause on the authority of Ex parte Jackson, 516 So.2d 768 (Ala.1986). This case is hereby remanded to the trial court to give the district attorney an opportunity to come forward with race-neutral explanations for his use of peremptory strikes. If he is unable to do so and the trial court determines that the facts establish a prima facie case of purposeful discrimination, Zackery is entitled to a new trial. See Owens v. State, [Ms. 85-1008, January 9, 1987] (Ala.1987).

REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.

All the Judges concur.

ON RETURN TO REMAND

Following a hearing, the trial court has determined that a prima facie case of purposeful discrimination was established as to the prosecutor’s use of peremptory strikes in excluding all of the blacks on the [2]*2venire from jury service. The appellant is therefore entitled to a new trial. Jurisdiction of this cause is remanded to the circuit court. This appeal is moot and is, therefore, dismissed.

OPINION EXTENDED; APPEAL DISMISSED.

All the Judges concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

521 So. 2d 1, 1987 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 5637, 1987 WL 483, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zackery-v-state-alacrimapp-1987.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack