Neal v. Delaware

1 Analyses of this case by attorneys

  1. Capital Defense Weekly, December 25 , 2000

    Capital Defense NewsletterDecember 25, 2000

    e tradition for several years, there will be no edition next week as the courts are virtually shut down for the holidays and there will be little to cover.Happy holidays.Supreme CourtThe Supreme Court is currently in recess.Capital CasesRIDEAU v. WHITLEY (5thCir 12/22/00 - No. 99-30849) (prior capital case) Token inclusion of a single African-American on the grand jury panel does not rectify the overwhelming statistical evidence of under representation and, coupled with a racially non-neutral selection process, constitutes a prima facie case of racial discrimination.For well over a century, the Supreme Court has held that a criminal conviction of an African-American cannot stand under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment if it is based on an indictment of a grand jury from which African-Americans were excluded on the basis of race.SeeRose v. Mitchell, 443 U.S. 545, 556 (1979);Alexander v. Louisiana, 405 U.S. 625, 628 (1972);Bush v. Kentucky, 107 U.S. 110, 119 (1883);Neal v. Delaware, 103 U.S. 370, 394 (1881);see alsoCastaneda v. Partida, 430 U.S. 482, 492-95 & n.12 (1977). Recently the Supreme Court reaffirmed this principle in holding that a white criminal defendant has the requisite standing to raise equal protection and due process objections to discrimination against black persons in the selection of grand juries.Campbell v. Louisiana, 523 U.S. 392, 397-401 (1998).