Foster v. Chatman

2016-05-23

Headline: Ruling finds prosecutors struck black jurors for race, reverses Georgia order and sends case back, making it harder for race-based jury strikes to survive review in death-penalty cases.

Holding: The Court held that prosecutors struck prospective jurors in substantial part because of race, reversed Georgia’s unexplained order, and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with that finding.

Real World Impact:

Invalidates peremptory strikes motivated substantially by race, possibly reopening affected cases.
Prompts courts to consider prosecutors' internal files in jury-bias claims.
Allows federal review when state procedural bars depend on federal constitutional rulings.

Topics: race and jury selection, jury discrimination, death penalty, prosecutorial records

Summary

Background

A man convicted of a brutal 1986 murder and sentenced to death in Georgia, Timothy Foster, argued that prosecutors used peremptory strikes to remove all black prospective jurors. At trial five black jurors were qualified, one was removed for cause, and the State struck the remaining four; Foster objected under this Court’s Batson rule. State courts repeatedly denied relief; during later state habeas proceedings Foster obtained prosecution files under Georgia’s Open Records Act and introduced documents from the prosecution office.

Reasoning

The Court focused on whether the prosecutors’ stated race-neutral reasons were credible. The newly produced file showed green highlighting and “B” markings next to black names, a handwritten “definite NO’s” list with black names first, notes labeled “B#1”–“B#3,” and a “No Black Church” comment. The Court found the prosecution’s courtroom explanations contradicted those records and the trial transcript, included shifting reasons, and contained misrepresentations. Considering all circumstantial evidence, the Court concluded the strikes of two specific black jurors were motivated in substantial part by race, reversed the Georgia Supreme Court’s order, and remanded for further proceedings.

Real world impact

The decision means prosecutors’ internal jury-selection materials can be probative in Batson challenges. It reverses a state-court denial here and sends the case back for further action. The Court also addressed and rejected a state-law obstruction to federal review, allowing federal consideration when a state procedural bar depends on federal law.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Alito agreed the case must be remanded but emphasized state rules on relitigation and left state-law res judicata questions for the Georgia courts; Justice Thomas dissented, arguing jurisdiction was doubtful and urging deference to trial-court credibility findings.