Preview:

Supreme Court of Louisiana
FOR IMMEDIATE NEWS RELEASE FROM: CLERK OF SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA The Opinions handed down on the 13th day of March, 2012, are as follows: NEWS RELEASE #014

BY JOHNSON, J.:

2010-KO-1724 c/w 2010-KO-1726

STATE OF LOUISIANA v. GLEN DALE NELSON c/w STATE OF LOUISIANA v. MELVIN M. GOLDMAN (Parish of Ouachita) (Illegal use of weapons; armed robbery; conspiracy to commit armed robbery; habitual offender) For the reasons assigned herein, we find the trial court erred both in its application of Batson, and in formulating a remedy for the alleged Batson violation. Therefore, we are compelled to reverse the decision of the court of appeal, vacate the convictions and sentences, and remand the matters to the trial court for a new trial. JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF APPEAL REVERSED; DEFENDANTS' CONVICTIONS AND SENTENCES ARE VACATED. THESE MATTERS ARE HEREBY REMANDED TO THE TRIAL COURT FOR A NEW TRIAL. VICTORY, J., concurs in the result with reasons. GUIDRY, J., concurs in part and dissents in part and assigns reasons. SEXTON, J. ad hoc, concurs in the result.

03/13/12 SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA No. 2010-KO-1724 STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS GLEN DALE NELSON CONSOLIDATED WITH No. 2010-KO-1726 STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS MELVIN M. GOLDMAN ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEAL, SECOND CIRCUIT, PARISH OF OUACHITA JOHNSON, Justice* Defendants, Glen Dale Nelson and Melvin Goldman, were convicted by jury of one count of illegal use of weapons in violation of La. R.S. 14:94, four counts of armed robbery in violation of La. R.S. 14:64, and one count of conspiracy to commit armed robbery in violation of La. R.S. 14:26. Both defendants received substantial sentences as habitual offenders. Defendants appealed their convictions, asserting as error the trial court's handling of jury selection, specifically its handling of a "reverse-Batson"1 challenge by the State. Finding no error by the trial court, the court of appeal affirmed.2 We granted defendants' writ applications to review the

* Retired Judge Fred C. Sexton, Jr., assigned as Justice ad hoc, sitting for Clark, Justice recused.
1

Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 106 S. Ct. 1712, 90 L. Ed. 2d 69 (1986). State v. Goldman, 45,293 (La. App. 2 Cir. 6/23/10), 41 So. 3d 642.

2

1

correctness of the court of appeal's decision.3 Although the defendants asserted additional assignments of error in the court of appeal, none are at issue in this Court. The sole issue addressed by this Court is the reverse-Batson issue. We decline to address the additional assignments of error raised by defendant Goldman. For the following reasons, we reverse the decision of the court of appeal, vacate the defendants' convictions and sentences, and remand these matters to the trial court for a new trial. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY On December 2, 2007, three armed men entered a mobile home to rob the occupants who were in the midst of a high-stakes poker game. The robbers had been called to the game by James McGraw, whose task it was to summon them at an appropriate time and then to feign being a victim. One of the victims identified McGraw's half-brother, Glen Dale Nelson, as one of the masked armed robbers. McGraw ultimately pled guilty and identified the remaining two robbers as Melvin Goldman and Keith Blakes, who also pled guilty and implicated defendants, Nelson and Goldman. Nelson and Goldman were represented by separate counsel, but tried together after the trial court denied Goldman's motion to sever. Trial began on May 18, 2009, and voir dire was conducted with three panels of sixteen prospective jurors. The first panel included five black prospective jurors; the second panel included six black prospective jurors; and the third panel included four black prospective jurors. After the first panel was examined, the trial court stated that peremptory challenges, twelve for each co-defendant and twenty-four for the State, would be exercised simultaneously in writing with duplicate challenges assessed against all parties who exercised them. The court also offered that defense
3

State v. Goldman, 2010-1726 (La. 4/25/11), 62 So.3d 67; State v. Nelson, 2010-1724 (La. 4/25/11), 62 So.3d 68.

2

counsel for each co-defendant could confer if they chose, so as not to duplicate their peremptory challenges. Goldman, represented by Mr. Walker, exercised eight peremptory challenges to excuse white jurors and one to excuse a black juror. Nelson, represented by Mr. Racer, used nine peremptory challenges, all against white jurors. In total, seventeen of the eighteen peremptory challenges exercised by the defendants were used to excuse white prospective jurors. The State used seven out of ten peremptory challenges to remove prospective black jurors. With a venire that was approximately thirty-three percent black, the eight jurors provisionally selected at that time were evenly divided along racial lines.4 When voir dire resumed, the State urged a reverse-Batson objection, arguing that defense counsel had used their peremptory challenges to exclude white prospective jurors. The State further argued that because defense counsel conferred before striking prospective jurors, the court should consider their peremptory usage together for purposes of Batson. According to the State, the cooperative use of seventeen out of eighteen peremptory challenges to strike white prospective jurors constituted prima facie evidence of discriminatory intent. The trial court initially agreed with the State, stating: Okay, look, gentlemen, it looks like the State has made - matter of fact, I'm about to rule that the State has made a prima facie case. Now, this Batson objection is made against

Download 2010-KO-1724 c/w 2010-KO-1726 STATE OF LOUISIANA v. GLEN DALE NELSON c/w STATE O

Louisiana Law