Flores v. Holder

Background

Duane E. Buck, convicted of capital murder, killed his ex-girlfriend and another person in 1995; witnesses saw the crimes, and an arresting officer said Buck laughed and said "the bitch deserved what she got." A jury found he posed a continuing danger and sentenced him to death. At the penalty phase the defense called psychologist Walter Quijano, who prepared a report listing statistical factors for future dangerousness that included race, stating "Black: Increased probability." The defense elicited Quijano's testimony about race on direct examination and introduced his report over the prosecutor's objection; the prosecutor later asked one brief question about race but did not argue it in closing.

Reasoning

The Court denied review of Buck's petition. Justice Alito, joined by Justices Scalia and Breyer, explained that this case differs from others because Buck's counsel, not the State, first elicited the race-related testimony, so the defense bore responsibility for putting that testimony before the jury. In other similar cases the State or its prosecutors had elicited such testimony and later confessed error, leading to new sentencing. Because the record showed the defense elicited the disputed testimony here, Justice Alito concluded certiorari should be denied.

Real world impact

By denying review, the Court left Buck's death sentence intact and avoided deciding the broader legal questions about race-charged expert testimony. The ruling does not resolve whether such testimony should bar a death sentence in other cases, and it leaves open questions about inconsistent state responses and possible remedies.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Sotomayor, joined by Justice Kagan, dissented from the denial, arguing the record was marred by racial overtones and misleading state statements and that the case deserved further review.