Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 42 (2003)

Page:   Index   Previous  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  48  49  Next

Cite as: 537 U. S. 322 (2003)

Thomas, J., dissenting

does not mean matching any one of several reasons the prosecution gave for striking a potential juror—it means matching all of them.

This leaves Rand, Kennedy, and Bozeman.8 Petitioner alleges that white jurors Hearn and Mazza were as ambivalent about the death penalty as these three struck black veniremen. Justice Scalia has adequately demonstrated that this is absurd with respect to Kennedy and Bozeman, but I agree that petitioner makes a slightly better case with Rand. Ante, at 352-353 (concurring opinion). However, since the burden is on petitioner to show, by clear and convincing evidence, that Rand was struck because of his race, I find this sliver of evidence, even when combined with petitioner's circumstantial evidence, insufficient to rebut § 2254(e)(1)'s presumption.

C

Petitioner's accounts of "disparate questioning " also amount to little of substance. Petitioner argues that the prosecution posed different questions at voir dire depending on the race of the venireman on two subjects: the death penalty and the minimum punishment allowed under law. Neither accusation can withstand a careful examination of the full record or help petitioner assemble the requisite clear and convincing evidence.

some people could not be rehabilitated. In analyzing Batson claims the focus should not be on the "reasonableness of the asserted nonracial motive . . . [but] rather [on] the genuineness of the motive." Purkett, 514 U. S., at 769 (emphasis in original).

8 The prosecution's stated reasons for striking Bozeman were that he was ambivalent about the death penalty and that he made prodefense remarks about rehabilitation. This is one case where the prosecution gave multiple reasons for a strike and petitioner actually correctly alleged the existence of a similarly situated white venireman, Hearn. Petitioner believes, albeit erroneously, see ante, at 351-353 (Scalia, J., concurring), that Hearn expressed similar ambivalence about the death penalty and made prodefense remarks about rehabilitation.

363

Page:   Index   Previous  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  48  49  Next

Last modified: October 4, 2007