Flowers v. Mississippi

2019-06-21

Headline: Court reverses conviction, finds prosecutor repeatedly excluded Black prospective jurors across six trials, blocks racially discriminatory peremptory strikes and orders further proceedings.

Holding: The Court held that, taken together, the prosecutor’s pattern—including using peremptory strikes (no‑question juror removals) to strike 41 of 42 Black prospective jurors across six trials and five of six at the sixth trial—showed racial motivation and required reversal.

Real World Impact:

Requires judges to consider prosecutors' prior juror strikes and questioning patterns.
Makes it harder for prosecutors to hide racially motivated juror strikes.
Sends case back to state court for further proceedings consistent with opinion.

Topics: jury selection, racial bias, peremptory strikes, prosecutorial misconduct

Summary

Background

Curtis Flowers, a Black man, was tried six times in Mississippi for four 1996 murders in a small town, Winona. The same white prosecutor led all six trials. Early trials ended in convictions that the Mississippi Supreme Court reversed for prosecutorial misconduct. Two later trials were mistrials. At the sixth trial, Flowers was convicted and sentenced to death. Over the six trials the State attempted to strike nearly all Black prospective jurors, and at the sixth trial it struck five of six Black prospective jurors.

Reasoning

The Court addressed whether the prosecutor’s use of no‑question juror removals violated the rule that jurors cannot be removed for racial reasons. The Justices focused on four combined facts: the historical pattern across earlier trials; the five-of-six strikes at the sixth trial; dramatically different, more intense questioning of Black prospective jurors; and the strike of Carolyn Wright even though similar white jurors were not struck. Considering the whole record, the Court found the trial court clearly erred and reversed the Mississippi Supreme Court’s approval of the strike.

Real world impact

The ruling directly affects jury selection practices. Trial judges must weigh a prosecutor’s prior strikes, side-by-side juror comparisons, and uneven questioning when reviewing claims of racial bias. Prosecutors will face closer scrutiny of why they questioned or investigated some jurors more than others. The decision does not create a new rule but enforces existing protection against racial removal of jurors. The case is sent back to state court for further proceedings consistent with the opinion.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Alito wrote a short concurrence saying the case was unusually extreme and agreeing with reversal here. Justice Thomas wrote a lengthy dissent defending the state courts and the prosecutor’s race-neutral explanations; Justice Gorsuch joined parts of that dissent.