Jan 3, 2025 Story by: Editor
Earlier this month, Colorado’s second-highest court upheld a decision that an Arapahoe County prosecutor did not exclude a Black woman from a jury due to her race, despite the woman attributing her previous negative experiences with law enforcement to “the color of my skin.”
Under U.S. Supreme Court precedent, intentionally discriminating against jurors based on race during jury selection is unconstitutional. Typically, lawyers can use “peremptory strikes” to dismiss jurors without providing a reason. However, if a prosecutor seeks to remove a juror of color, the defense can raise a “Batson challenge,” named after the Supreme Court’s Batson v. Kentucky ruling, requiring the prosecutor to provide a “race-neutral” explanation for the exclusion.
The Batson challenge follows a three-step process: First, the defense must suggest a plausible racial motivation for dismissing the juror. Next, the prosecution must present a race-neutral justification. Finally, the judge evaluates whether racial discrimination likely occurred.
In 2022, Adrien Jabrie Ramsey stood trial for three drug-related charges. During jury selection, the prosecutor asked potential jurors if anyone held negative views about police officers.
A Black woman, referred to as Juror K, responded that she respected law enforcement but was “highly suspicious” of some officers. She cited personal experiences and high-profile incidents like George Floyd’s death, saying, “I’ve also been in certain instances that were questionable just by, you know, the color of my skin. I’ve also had certain families that have gone through certain things.”
When asked if she believed some officers were trustworthy, Juror K agreed but added, “I also agree that not all of them are fully honest, and over the course of history they’ve been put in place to — to keep certain people in their place, or to put more of us in jail.” She clarified that she would assess police testimony based on its merit, stating, “I would not automatically believe witnesses because they were police officers but would need to hear the testimony first.”
The prosecutor acknowledged her fairness but moved to strike Juror K. This prompted a Batson challenge from the defense. The prosecutor justified the removal by arguing Juror K indicated it would “be very difficult for her” to trust police testimony and that she might not view police as credible witnesses.
District Court Judge Ben L. Leutwyler allowed the dismissal, reasoning that Juror K might not provide a fair evaluation of police testimony. He stated, “Although Juror K’s beliefs and experience may be formed as a result of her race and seeing police activity in her, I’ll say, ‘racial community,’ that, to me, is not persuasive because we all have … experiences that are derived from our own communities.”
The jury ultimately convicted Ramsey, resulting in a 10-year prison sentence.
On appeal, Ramsey’s defense argued that the prosecution’s justification for dismissing Juror K was inherently tied to her race. Public defender John P. Finnegan wrote, “She was struck because, as a Black person, she had experienced racial discrimination at the hands of police, which contributed to her perception of their credibility. But what’s unfair is to pile racial discrimination upon racial discrimination and call it neutrality.”
While Ramsey’s appeal was pending, the Colorado Supreme Court issued rulings in June affirming that a prosecutor can cite a juror’s distrust of police as a valid, race-neutral reason for exclusion—provided the explanation does not directly link distrust to the juror’s race. Justice William W. Hood III emphasized, “The fact remains that it is not an inherent characteristic of any race. Assuming otherwise is simply another form of inappropriate stereotyping.”
A three-judge panel of the Court of Appeals agreed with this interpretation, finding the prosecutor in Ramsey’s case provided a race-neutral justification for removing Juror K. Judge Neeti V. Pawar wrote, “The step two inquiry focuses on the prosecution’s stated reason, not the basis for the juror’s bias, even when that bias is ‘closely linked to (or because of)’ the juror’s race.”
Despite this, the appellate court overturned one of Ramsey’s drug convictions, ordering a retrial under a 2022 voter-approved measure that decriminalized certain psychedelic substances.
Colorado’s judiciary continues to deliberate over potential reforms to prevent racial bias in jury selection. Proposed changes include restricting dismissals of jurors of color for reasons correlated with race, such as expressing distrust of police. However, recent Supreme Court rulings have dampened the prospects for such reforms, with some justices suggesting lawmakers should instead eliminate peremptory strikes altogether.
Several other states are also reevaluating jury selection protocols to address ongoing concerns about racial bias and ensure equitable practices in the courtroom. Source: Colorado Politics
