Jeffrey Uttecht, Superintendent, Washington State Penitentiary v. Cal Coburn Brown

Subject:

Death Penalty, Habeas Corpus, Juror Removal, Criminal Law & Procedure

In Wainwright v. Witt, 469 U.S. 412 (1985), and Darden v. Wainwright, 477 U.S. 168 (1986), this Court held that a state trial judge may, without setting forth any explicit findings or conclusions, remove a juror for cause when the judge determines the juror's views on the death penalty would substantially impair his or her ability to follow the law and perform the duties of a juror. The Court further held that a federal habeas court reviewing the decision to remove the juror must defer to the trial judge's ability to observe the juror's demeanor and credibility, and apply the statutory presumption of correctness to the judge's implicit factual determination of the juror's substantial impairment.

Did the Ninth Circuit err by not deferring to the trial judge's observations and by not applying the statutory presumption of correctness in ruling that the state court decision to remove a juror was contrary to clearly established federal law?

Resources:

• Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
• Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket