Nevada Supreme Court overturns murder conviction because woman bounced from jury pool for being Demo

[Grassy Knoll]

Source: rgj.com

The Nevada Supreme Court has overturned the first-degree murder conviction of a Las Vegas man, ruling that a woman was wrongly bumped from the jury pool because she is a Democrat.

<snip>
The Las Vegas Sun reported Justice Mark Gibbons said the prosecution’s reason for seeking dismissal of the woman, who is black, was that she was a registered Democrat and had “Democratic” views on law enforcement.

Read more: http://www.rgj.com/article/20121228/NEWS01/312280049/Nevada-Supreme-Court-overturns-murder-conviction-because-woman-bounced-from-jury-pool-being-Democrat

[Deep13]

1. idiotic move by the DA.

stupid

[atreides1]

7. DA

In this case it stands for Dumb Ass...

[malz]

12. Same initials as

Dick Armey. Coincidence?

[Deep13]

14. LOL nt

[TorchTheWitch]

16. it's the judge that let it get by that is more idiotic

It's the judge that approves or not requests by either side to dismiss a juror. And both sides engage in ridiculous requests of the court in their favor throughout any case. It's the judge that is ultimately responsible for approving the DA's request to dump this juror for the reason he gave in requesting it.

[Deep13]

18. yup. nt

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

2. Well, at least the DA didn't dismiss her because of her race ...

... just because of her political party ... nudge, nudge, wink, wink.

Stupid DA. If the guy was really guilty, now he's back on the street. Good move.

[freshwest]

4. +1

[Jim Lane]

6. There will be a retrial.

You write, "If the guy was really guilty, now he's back on the street." If he was convicted, but then the conviction overturned on a procedural point like this, the Double Jeopardy Clause doesn't apply and he can be tried again.

The DA's conduct doesn't mean that a criminal will go free. It does, however, result in the delay and expense of a second trial, and possibly a second appeal.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

8. Thanks for the info

Is the application of Double Jeopardy a simple concept, or are there a myriad of rules on when it applies and when it doesn't?

I claim "zero" knowledge of legal procedures etc.

Anyway, it's good to know that a murderer will not be set free by a dumb mistake by a prosecutor.

Regards.

[Lochloosa]

9. Double Jeopardy is pretty simple. If your found not guilty you can't be tried for the same offense

again. Getting a conviction overturned on procedural grounds does not preclude you from being tried again.

[reACTIONary]

10. I think this is a mistrial...

... from the wiki, here is the mistrial rule:

Prosecution after mistrial: The rule for mistrials depends upon who sought the mistrial. If the defendant moves for a mistrial, there is no bar to retrial, unless the prosecutor acted in "bad faith," i.e. goaded the defendant into moving for a mistrial because the government specifically wanted a mistrial. If the prosecutor moves for a mistrial, there is no bar to retrial if the trial judge finds "manifest necessity" for granting the mistrial. The same standard governs mistrials granted sua sponte.

In this case, the defendant is moving for mistrial, based on the prosecutor's dismissal of the juror, so there isn't a bar to retrial.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

17. Ok, that little detail escaped me

From the article, I got the impression that the verdict was reversed, that he was declared "not guilty".

My bad reading.

Thanks

[ButterflyBlood]

11. Double jeopardy applies to being acquitted

A mistrial is not the same thing.

[Jim Lane]

13. The essence is that a final adjudication on the merits can't be revisited.

It applies to an acquittal, and even to a conviction. (The defendant who's convicted can't be retried just because the prosecutor wants a harsher sentence.)

A decision that the trial was flawed in some ways is not an adjudication on the merits, i.e., it doesn't relate to the guilt or innocence of the defendant. Here, the flaw was the prosecutor's improper conduct during jury selection.

I don't think this reversal is the same as a mistrial. A trial judge declares a mistrial when any verdict by the jury will be fatally flawed. For example, if the prosecutor in his or her closing argument had made an improper appeal to prejudice, the judge might decide to end the case, thank the jurors for their service, dismiss them without asking them for a verdict, give the prosecutor a good tongue-lashing, and order that there be a new trial with a completely new jury.

In this instance, judgment was entered on the jury verdict. The appellate court reversed the decision and vacated that judgment. It's not a mistrial, but it's similar in that the decision in the defendant's favor didn't turn on a question of his guilt or innocence.

Another way to look at it is that we've now discovered, after the fact, that the defendant in this trial wasn't in jeopardy of being punished, because the Nevada Supreme Court would reverse any decision against him. He wasn't in jeopardy the first time so retrying him isn't double jeopardy.

[Eleanors38]

3. Such GOPer fidelity to law & order: ideology trumps even a murder conviction.

[LiberalFighter]

5. The DA should be removed from office for refusing to follow his oath.

[DeSwiss]

15. The prosecutor is an ASS......

...and so is the racist judge.

District Court Judge Doug Smith decided to hold a hearing, but called a 15-minute recess during which he disqualified the woman, according to court records.


Jermaine Brass ---- Ronnie Brass

Ronnie Brass was stabbed to death in March while serving his sentence at the Ely State Prison.

K&R