Home › Case briefs › Criminal Procedure

Batson v. Kentucky

Supreme Court of the United States · 1986 · Criminal Procedure

Criminal ProcedureEqual Protectionperemptory challengesrace discriminationjury selectionEqual Protection Clauseperemptory strikespurposeful discrimination

Facts

Petitioner, a black man, was tried in Kentucky on felony charges. During jury selection, after jurors were excused for cause, the prosecutor used peremptory challenges to strike all four black persons on the venire, resulting in an all-white jury. Defense counsel moved before the jury was sworn to discharge the jury and requested a hearing, arguing that the strikes violated petitioner's constitutional rights. The trial judge denied the motion, stating the parties could use peremptory challenges to strike anybody they wanted to.

Issue

May a criminal defendant establish an equal protection violation based solely on the prosecutor's use of peremptory challenges at his own trial to strike venire members of the defendant's race? If so, what prima facie showing is required, and what must the State do in response?

Rule

A defendant may establish a prima facie case of purposeful racial discrimination in selection of the petit jury solely from the prosecutor's exercise of peremptory challenges at the defendant's trial. To do so, the defendant must show that he is a member of a cognizable racial group, that the prosecutor used peremptory challenges to remove members of the defendant's race from the venire, and that these facts and any other relevant circumstances raise an inference that the prosecutor excluded those venire members on account of race. Once that prima facie showing is made, the burden shifts to the State to come forward with a neutral explanation related to the particular case; the prosecutor may not rely on racial assumptions, mere denial of discriminatory motive, or general assertions of good faith.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In a robbery trial in Detroit, Darnell Price, who is Black, objects before the jury is sworn after the prosecutor uses peremptory challenges to remove all three Black venire members who remained after cause challenges. The prosecutor had asked those three no unusual questions and the trial judge says Darnell cannot complain unless he proves the office has done the same thing in many prior cases.

Under the governing equal protection rule, how should the judge rule on Darnell's objection?

Explanation. A criminal defendant may establish a prima facie equal protection violation solely from the prosecutor's use of peremptory challenges at the defendant's own trial. The defendant must show he is a member of a cognizable racial group, that the prosecutor struck venire members of the defendant's race, and that the facts and other relevant circumstances raise an inference of discrimination. The majority rejected any requirement that the defendant prove a pattern across many cases.