NACDL - National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers

This discussion was be moderated by Blair Bowie, Legal Counsel and Restore Your Vote Manager at the Campaign Legal Center, and featured Naila Awan, Director of Advocacy for the Prison Policy Initiative; Tatyana Hopkins, student at the UDC Law Youth Justice Clinic; and BeKura W. Shabazz, President of the Criminal Injustice Reform Network.

Webinar Resources

• Free to Vote: Virginia Defender Resource Packet, Youth Justice Clinic at the University of the District of Columbia David A. Clarke School of Law and the Criminal Injustice Reform Network, October 2021. 

• Georgia Open Records Request Template, Youth Justice Clinic at the University of the District of Columbia David A. Clarke School of Law, October 2021. 

• Ballots for All: Holding Pennsylvania County Jails Accountable for Providing Ballot Access, All Voting is Local, September 2021.

• Amending Our Anti-democratic Ways: The Criminal Justice System Must Stop Disenfranchising Children, Mae C. Quinn and Greg Leding, August 4, 2021. 

• Maryland HB 222 (Effective June 1, 2021)

• Voting Behind Bars: Why Incarceration Should Not Limit the Right to Vote, Sanjana Manjeshwar, Berkely Political Review, May 21, 2021. 

• Enfranchisement for All: The Case for Ending Penal Disenfranchisement in Our Democracy, Naila Awan and Laura Williamson, Demos, March 2021.

• Eligible, but excluded: A guide to removing the barriers to jail voting, Prison Policy Initiative and Rainbow PUSH Coalition, October 2020.

• Systemic Inequality | Ballot Access Behind Bars, Robin Fisher, Fordham Law Review Online, 2020. 

• Many people in jail are eligible to vote. But casting a ballot behind bars isn't easy, Ryan W. Miller, USA Today, October 30, 2020.

• Challenging Jail-Based Disenfranchisement: A Resource Guide for Advocates, Campaign Legal Center.

• Case: Mays v. LaRose, litigated by Campaign Legal Center and Demos.

• Unlock the Vote Arizona: Procedures for Jail-Based Voting by County, Arizona Coalition to End Jail-Based Disenfranchisement, July 2020.

• Ballots for All: Ensuring Eligible Wisconsin Voters in Jail Have Equal Access to Voting, All Voting is Local and ACLU of Wisconsin, July 2020.

• How to End De Facto Disenfranchisement in the Criminal Justice System, Naila Awan and Shruti Banerjee, Demos, May 2020.

• Voting in Jails, The Sentencing Project, May 2020.

• Jail as Polling Places: Living Up to the Obligation to Enfranchise the Voters We Jail, Dana Paikowsky, Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review, 2019. 

• Know Your Rights: Voting in Jail, ACLU Virginia, October 2019.

• Overcoming Barriers that Prevent Eligible Incarcerated People from Voting in Massachusetts, Ballots over Bars (now MASS POWER), October 2019.

• Protecting the Voting Rights ot Americans Detained While Awaiting Trial, Danielle Root and Lee Doyle, Center for American Progress, August 2018. 

• Voting Behind Bars: An Argument for Voting by Prisoners, The Sentencing Project, June 2011. 

While many individuals are behind bars for only a short time, the backbone of mass incarceration is people serving very lengthy sentences – often decades-long, and far longer than they would serve for comparable crimes elsewhere in the world. Society’s emerging recognition that it has over-used imprisonment is exemplified in a wide range of changes at the front end: reducing the potential for individuals to enter the criminal justice system. However, to tackle the problem of mass incarceration at its core, reforms must also target those currently experiencing incarceration.

This webinar brings together practitioners and advocates for a discussion on “Second Look Sentencing,” an emerging legislative trend that seeks to provide individuals with the opportunity for resentencing or a sentence reduction after they have served a certain amount of time in prison. Panelists discuss “Second Look” legislative efforts to enact reforms nationwide, and NACDL’s model “Second Look Sentencing” legislation and accompanying report. Watch the webinar recording to gain a better understanding of how adopting a “Second Look” model can safely reduce the number of individuals serving excessive, counterproductive sentences and turn the tide of mass incarceration.

Webinar Resources

• No End In Sight: America's Enduring Reliance on Life Imprisonment, The Sentencing Project, February 2021.

• Second Look Sentencing: A (Running) Reading List for Legislators, Staff, Advocates, and Everyone Else, Greg Newburn, Dec. 11, 2020.

• Second Look = Second Chance: The NACDL Model "Second Look" Legislation and Accompanying Report, NACDL, Released Dec. 2020.

• How to End a Sentence by Mitch Ryals, Washington City Paper, Oct. 10, 2019. 

• The IRAA and the SLAA: Moving Beyond Nonviolent Drug Offenders to Address Mass Incarceration by Jonathan Blanks, Cato Institute, Sept. 13, 2019. 

• James Zeigler: DC Council's 'second look' sentencing efforts are thoughtful, safe and just responses to the crisis of mass incarceration, The DC Line, Aug. 13, 2019. 

• Ameliorating the Federal Trial Penalty through a Systematic Judicial “Second Look” Procedure by JaneAnne Murray, University of Minnesota Law School, April/June, 2019

• As a teen he killed a man. A new law has given him a second chance by Keith L. Alexander, The Washington Post, Sept. 6, 2018. 

• Finality and Rehabilitation by Meghan J. Ryan, Wake Forest Journal of Law & Policy, April 2014

• Re-Balancing Fitness, Fairness, and Finality for Sentences by Douglas A. Berman, Ohio State Moritz College of Law, May 2014

• Changing the Sentence without Hiding the Truth: Judicial Sentence Modification as a Promising Method of Early Release by Cecelia Klingele, William & Mary Law Review, Nov. 2010

• Second Look Sentencing, NACDL.
   

Additional Resources on Second Look

On October 30, 2019, NACDL hosted an advocacy call on drug-induced homicide laws. Speakers included Valena Elizabeth Beety, Professor of Law at Arizona State University Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law, and Deputy Director of the Academy for Justice, a new criminal justice center connecting research with policy reform; Leo Beletsky, Associate Professor of Law and Health Sciences at Northeastern University, where he is the faculty director of the Health in Justice Action Lab; and Lindsey LaSalle, Managing Director, Public Health, Law and Policy at the Drug Policy Alliance.

Background:
On the books in many states and federally, drug-induced homicide laws have gained in popularity as the country deals with an increase in drug overdose deaths. Drug-induced homicide laws seek to hold drug distributors criminally responsible for overdose deaths. Believed to target major drug traffickers, these laws are actually resulting in friends, family members and romantic partners of overdose victims being charged for their death. According to a 2017 report by the Drug Policy Alliance, individuals charged with or prosecuted for drug-induced homicide increased by over 300 percent in six years, to 1,178 in 2016 from 363 in 2011. Racial disparities are present with a disproportionate number of charges being brought in cases where the victim is white and the dealer is a person of color. Racial bias is also evident in the gaping disparity of the sentences being handed down to drug-induced homicide defendants of color – a median of nearly nine years, compared to five years for white defendants.

Resources:
Health in Justice Action Lab 
Drug-Induced Homicide Defense Toolkit
Charging ‘Dealers’ with Homicide: Explained
America’s Favorite Antidote: Drug-Induced Homicide in the Age of the Overdose Crisis
"A Dose of Reality: Drug Death Investigations and the Criminal Justice System", The Champion
The Overdose/Homicide Epidemic
DIH Law Proliferation 2009 2019 map (video)
DIH Law Proliferation 2009 2019 bar chart (video)

Learn more about NACDL's State Criminal Justice Network. Monica L. Reid, Host.  Music I Will! Rise Above (Jared C. Balogh) / CC BY-NC-SA 3.0.

Subscribe

On Thursday, June 21, 2018, NACDL hosted a discussion about the model legislation and a review of states that have enacted occupational licenses. Speakers included Lee McGrath, Managing Attorney of the Institute for Justice Minnesota office and IJ’s Senior Legislative Counsel; and Joshua House, an attorney with the Institute for Justice.

The Institute for Justice has developed a campaign including model legislation that serves as a resource for state legislatures to institute laws designed to alleviate the barriers those with a conviction are faced with in applying for licenses. NACDL is supporting the occupational licensing model legislation (“Occupational Licensing Review Act”) and the “Model Collateral Consequences Reduction Act.”

Background

One of the primary barriers for those formerly incarcerated who are reentering the workforce is the ability to obtain an occupational license. While incarcerated, many individuals are trained and employed in industries that require a license. However, even upon reentry they are unable to apply for these licenses that would enable them to work in those very fields that could essentially help end the ever-revolving recidivism door.

Resources 

Institute for Justice Model Collateral Consequences Reduction Act

Turning Shackles into Bootstraps: Why Occupational Licensing Reform Is the Missing Piece of Criminal Justice Reform, Center for the Study of Economic Liberty at Arizona State University, November 2016

Institute for Justice video re: Occupational Licensing

State Legislative Reforms

Learn more about NACDL's State Criminal Justice Network. Angelyn C. Frazer-Giles, Host. Doug Shaner, production supervisor.  Music I Will! Rise Above (Jared C. Balogh) / CC BY-NC-SA 3.0.

Subscribe

NACDL hosted a National Advocacy Call on Developing Legislation on Thursday, October, 19, 2017 at 2:00 p.m. EDT focused on the NACDL/FAMM State Clemency Project. The call featured Norman Reimer, Executive Director, NACDL; Mary Price, General Counsel, FAMM; and Alphonso David, Counsel, New York Governor Cuomo. The Project is collaborating with New York State to develop necessary processes and procedures and to provide logistical support enabling pro bono assistance for those seeking clemency.

Learn more about NACDL's State Criminal Justice Network. Angelyn C. Frazer-Giles, Host. Doug Shaner, production supervisor.  Music I Will! Rise Above (Jared C. Balogh) / CC BY-NC-SA 3.0.

Subscribe

Marsy's Law seeks to give crime victims legal standing in bail hearings, pleas, sentencing, and parole hearings. It also allows crime victims to refuse an interview or other discovery requests made by the accused or any person acting on behalf of the accused. The Law has passed in several states including California, Illinois, Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota. In North Dakota, issues with interpreting and implementing the law as it relates to the discovery process have been reported. Other states have experienced similar issues.

NACDL hosted a National Advocacy Call on Developing Legislation on Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 12:00 p.m. EST. The discussion focused on how state advocates can help stave off the aggressive proponents of this legislation. Speakers included: Barry Wilford, partner with the law firm Kura, Wilford & Schregardus Co. , L.P.A; Mark Friese, criminal defense lawyers from Bismarck, North Dakota; and Garrick Byers, a former public defender for 33 years in Contra Costa and Fresno Counties.

Learn more about NACDL's State Criminal Justice Network. Angelyn C. Frazer-Giles, Host. Doug Shaner, production supervisor.  Music I Will! Rise Above (Jared C. Balogh) / CC BY-NC-SA 3.0.

Marsy’s Law Resources 

Text: 

Marsy’s Law model constitutional amendment

Background: 

Listen: Attorney Mark Friese on Marsy’s Law for North Dakota 

Talking Points: 

NACDL talking points
ACLU of Montana 

Articles: 

Despite overwhelming legal opposition, voters gave crime victims their own bill of rights 
Victims’ rights law unfairly limits parole hearings, judge rules (California) 
City, county attorneys working to comply with Marsy’s Law (Montana) 
Devil is in details of Marsy’s Law (Montana) 
An IR View: Marsy’s Law is not the answer (Montana) 
Public defender says Marsy’s Law complicates efforts to defend her client (North Dakota) 
Marsy’s Law cost estimated at $2M per year (North Dakota) 
Mark Friese: “Marsy’s Law” ballot measure is a bad idea (North Dakota) 
As victims’ rights law makes ballot, other states grapple with pitfalls (Oklahoma) 
The billionaire behind ‘Marsy’s Law’ effort (Oklahoma) 
Journal Time Editorial: A fair trial first, then victims’ rights (Wisconsin) 
Montana Supreme Court: Marsy’s Law Initiative was unconstitutional (Montana)

States with Marsy’s Law: 

California (2008) 
Illinois (2014) 
North Dakota (2016) 
South Dakota (2016) 
Ohio (2017) 
Oklahoma (2018) 
Nevada (2018) 
Georgia (2018) 
Florida (2018) 
North Carolina (2018)

Voters in Montana and Kentucky also approved Marsy's Law measures in their perspective states. However, the Supreme Courts in each state declared Marsy's Law to be unconstitutional. Read more: Montana; Kentucky.

Fiscal Impacts:  

North Dakota  

Statement of estimated fiscal impact of constitution measure No. 3, Victims’ Rights Amendment - $4.0 million in additional expenditures for the 2017-19 biennium (prepared by the Office of Management and Budget)  

One-time funding of $815,000 is added for the statewide automated victim information and notification (SAVIN) program enhancement project. The enhancements will upgrade the SAVIN program so that it is able to provide the notification necessary to comply with Section 25 of Article I of the Constitution of North Dakota, also known as Marsy’s Law. Resources: 
Statement of Purpose of Amendment for House Bill No. 1003; 
65th Legislative Assembly State Budget Actions for the 2017-2019 Biennium: page 56 - $315,000 appropriation for the SAVIN program; page 57 - additional $500,000 for the SAVIN program enhancements.  

South Dakota  

$158,000 increase for software upgrades for the statewide automated victim information and notification system due to passage of Marsy’s Law. Resources: Fiscal note for SB 32, general appropriations act for FY 2017 – page 2.

North Carolina 

Estimated costs to the courts of $16.4 million in FY 2018-19 and $30.5 million annually in subsequent years for additional district attorney staff. Click here for full report on the fiscal impact.

 

Subscribe

Police access to and use of military equipment came under much scrutiny during protests that ensued after Michael Brown was shot and killed by a police officer in Ferguson, Missouri. The events that unfolded were in many ways reminiscent of the WTO protests in Seattle, Washington 15 years before.  

In October 2014, NACDL hosted a webinar entitled Under Siege: The Defense Bar Examines Police Militarization, Ethnic & Racial Dynamics of Sentencing, and Their Impact on Criminal Justice Outcomes. The webinar was in response to the uprisings in Ferguson, Missouri and the ensuing swift and extreme police response. The webinar also explored the plethora of polarizing issues including racism, implicit bias, disparate sentencing policies, as well as, the over-policing of minority and poor communities.

On Friday, December 9, 2016 from 1:00 p.m.-2:00 p.m. EST, NACDL continued this important discussion. Speakers included: Jumana Musa, NACDL Senior Privacy and National Security Counsel; and Craig Atkinson, Director of the documentary Do Not Resist.

Learn more about NACDL's State Criminal Justice Network. Angelyn C. Frazer-Giles, Host. Doug Shaner, production supervisor.  Music I Will! Rise Above (Jared C. Balogh) / CC BY-NC-SA 3.0.

Subscribe

November 2016, California voters considered two competing death penalty initiatives. Unfortunately, California’s Proposition 62 which would have repealed the death penalty and replace it with life without possibility of parole, failed 54% to 46%.

On Wednesday, September 14, 2016 NACDL’s State Criminal Justice Network held an advocacy call on Proposition 62, which would have abolished the death penalty, and Proposition 66, which will maintain the death penalty, but has the potential to cost the state even more and overburden local court resources. A recent report, “California Votes 2016: An Analysis of the Competing Death Penalty Ballot Initiatives,” outlines the current state of the death penalty system and analyzes how each initiative will work in practice.

Find out more:

Yes on Prop 62 
No On Prop 66 

Learn more about NACDL's State Criminal Justice Network. Angelyn C. Frazer-Giles, Host. Doug Shaner, production supervisor.  Music I Will! Rise Above (Jared C. Balogh) / CC BY-NC-SA 3.0.

Subscribe

On Tuesday, March 22, 2016 NACDL’s National Advocacy Call on Developing Legislation featured a discussion on civil asset forfeiture.  Audio of the program is available below.

Speakers included, Lee McGrath Managing Attorney of the Institute for Justice Minnesota office and serves as IJ’s Legislative Counsel; Andy Hoover the legislative director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania; and Kanya Bennett Legislative Counsel in the ACLU’s Washington Legislative Office.

Learn more about NACDL's State Criminal Justice Network. Angelyn C. Frazer-Giles, Host.  Doug Shaner, production supervisor.  Music I Will! Rise Above (Jared C. Balogh) / CC BY-NC-SA 3.0.

Resources: 

• There is Bipartisan Agreement on the ‘Uncivility’ of Civil Asset Forfeiture 
• Policing for Profit 
• ACLU Pennsylvania Civil Asset Forfeiture 

Subscribe

On January 25, 2016, in a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court ruled in Montgomery v. Louisiana that Miller v. Alabama would apply retroactively. These two cases concern the unconstitutionality of juveniles being sentenced to life without the possibility of parole. On Thursday, February 11, 2016, guests Marsha Levick, Deputy Director and Chief Counsel of the Juvenile Law Center and Jody Kent Lavy, Director and National Coordinator, Fair Sentencing of Youth discussed the decision and implications for state level advocacy.  Audio of the call and resources will be posted soon.

Learn more about NACDL's State Criminal Justice Network. Angelyn C. Frazer-Giles, Host.  Doug Shaner, production supervisor.  Music I Will! Rise Above (Jared C. Balogh) / CC BY-NC-SA 3.0.

Subscribe

On Thursday June, 18 2015 from 2:00 p.m.-3:00 p.m. EDT, NACDL hosted a call featuring a discussion on the report Treatment Industrial Complex: How For-Profit Prison Corporations are Undermining Efforts to Treat and Rehabilitate Prisoners for Corporate Gain. The report examines the move of profit prison corporations in reentry, treatment, and alternatives to incarceration.

Speakers: Elizabeth Kelley, Defense Attorney and Chair, NACDL Mental Health and Membership Committees; Caroline Isaacs, Program Director at American Friends Service Committee, Arizona; Eshe Cole, Mental Health and Criminal Justice Program Coordinator at Grassroots Leadership; and Kathryn Hamoudah, Public Policy and Communications Manager at the Southern Center for Human Rights. 

Learn more about NACDL's State Criminal Justice Network. Angelyn C. Frazer, Host.  Doug Shaner, production supervisor.  Music I Will! Rise Above (Jared C. Balogh) / CC BY-NC-SA 3.0.

Subscribe

We celebrated Bail Reform Month with the Justice Policy Institute and the Pretrial Justice Institute. The presenters included Michael Jones, a senior project associate for PJI, and Spike Bradford, who serves as JPI's juvenile justice expert. Learn more about NACDL's State Criminal Justice Network. Angelyn C. Frazer, Host. Steven Logan, production supervisor. Music I Will! Rise Above (Jared C. Balogh) / CC BY-NC-SA 3.0.

Subscribe

The National Advocacy Call on Developing Legislation in June featured a discussion on sentencing and re-sentencing Juvenile Life Without Parole (JLWOP) cases post Miller. Speakers included, LaShunda Hill, state strategist, and John Hardenberg, Litigation Specialist both with the Campaign for the Fair Sentencing of Youth and Marc Bookman the Director of Atlantic Center for Capital Representation. Learn more about NACDL's State Criminal Justice Network. Angelyn C. Frazer, Host. Steven Logan, production supervisor. Music I Will! Rise Above (Jared C. Balogh) / CC BY-NC-SA 3.0.

Subscribe

March’s advocacy call focused on unmanned aircraft commonly known as drones, and feature a discussion of pending legislation across the country. The panel discussed jurisdictions that have sought licenses for using the aircraft and legislation pending in several states. Panelists included Mason Clutter, National Security and Privacy Counsel for NACDL, Steven R. Morrison, assistant professor at the University of North Dakota School of Law, and Christopher Calabrese, the legislative counsel for privacy-related issues in the American Civil Liberties Union's Washington Legislative Office (WLO). Please visit NACDL's Domestic Drones Information Center for more information on the topic. Learn more about NACDL's State Criminal Justice Network. Angelyn C. Frazer, Host. Steven Logan, production supervisor. Music I Will! Rise Above (Jared C. Balogh) / CC BY-NC-SA 3.0.

Subscribe

NACDL’s State Criminal Justice Network (SCJN), has initiated a conference call series entitled National Advocacy Calls on Developing Legislation (NACDL).  The teleconferences generally feature an expert on an issue area and are designed to inform criminal defense lawyers and advocates across the country on a variety of criminal justice issues.  Key to the calls is informing participants of any legislation or litigation pending that seeks progressive reform on the issue, and serves as a call to action for advocates interested in developing strategies for legislative reform or litigious efforts in their jurisdictions. Learn more about NACDL's State Criminal Justice Network. Angelyn C. Frazer, Host. Steven Logan, production supervisor. Music I Will! Rise Above (Jared C. Balogh) / CC BY-NC-SA 3.0.

Subscribe

February's advocacy call was Wednesday February 13 at 12:00 p.m. EST and focused on legislation that passed around the country on medical and personal use marijuana. In particular the call focused on the state responses based on federal policies. Learn more about NACDL's State Criminal Justice Network. Angelyn C. Frazer, Host. Steven Logan, production supervisor. Music I Will! Rise Above (Jared C. Balogh) / CC BY-NC-SA 3.0.

Subscribe

In Batson v. Kentucky (1986), the Supreme Court created a two-step inquiry in order to determine whether the use of peremptory strikes were racially biased.  In what is now known as a Batson challenge, someone may object to the use of a peremptory strike on the grounds that it is being used to exclude a potential juror based on race. In 2010, the Equal Justice Initiative conducted a comprehensive study that exposed that the racially biased use of peremptory strikes persists, and Colorado is no exception. This year, Colorado legislators considered SB 128, legislation that would have allowed courts and opposing counsel to raise objections to the use of peremptory challenges that eliminate jurors for reasons that correlate to race. The bill would have provided a list of presumptively invalid reasons for peremptory challenges, such as having prior contact with law enforcement officers, receiving state benefits, or residing in certain neighborhoods.
 
On Monday, March 28th, 2022, NACDL hosted Struck: Race, Jury Selection, and the Need for Reform in Colorado, a webinar that delved into the discriminatory use of peremptory strikes in jury selection and avenues for reform. The discussion was moderated by NACDL’s Public Defense Counsel Monica Milton and featured the nation’s leading jury experts including Paula Hannaford-Agor, Director of the Center for Jury Studies at the National Center for State Courts; Tristan Gorman, Policy Director, Colorado Criminal Defense Bar; and Brendon Woods, Alameda County Public Defender. 

 

Webinar Resources

• Colorado SB22-128

• Fact Sheet: Preventing Implicit Bias in Criminal Jury Selection, Colorado Criminal Defense Bar, February 22, 2022. 

• Race and the Jury: Illegal Racial Discrimination in Jury Selection, Equal Justice Initiative, 2021.

• Batson Reform: State by State, Berkeley Law (web resource)

• From the Community to the Courtroom: Increasing Diversity and Access to the Jury Box (3-Part NACDL Webinar Series)

• Arizona Supreme Court Will Be First State to End Peremptory Challenges to Potential Jurors, By Paul Devenport, Associated Press, August 29, 2021.

• Commentary: California Passed a New Law to Diversify Juries. Here’s Why It’s So Important. By Jerry Wallingford, The San Diego Union Tribune, December 3, 2020.

• California Adopts New Laws to Fight Racism in Jury Selection, By Kyle C Barry, The Appeal, September 30, 2020.

• Color-Blind But Not Color-Deaf: Accent Discrimination in Jury Selection, Jasmine Gonzales Rose, 44 N.Y.U Rev. L. & Soc. Change 309 (2020)

• Whitewashing the Jury Box: How California Perpetuates the Discriminatory Exclusion of Black and Latinx Jurors, Berkeley Law Death Penalty Clinic, June 2020.

• Washington Supreme Court is First in Nation to Adopt Rule to Reduce Implicit Racial Bias in Jury Selection, ACLU, April 9, 2018.

• Washington Supreme Court General Rule 37: Jury Selection

• A Call to Criminal Courts: Record Rules for Batson, Catherine Grosso and Barbara O’Brien, Kentucky Law Journal, Vol. 105 (2017).

• Object Anyway, More Perfect by NPR, July 2016 (podcast).

• This is How Prosecutors (Still) Keep Black People Off Juries, By Michael Mechanic, Mother Jones, November 5, 2015.

• Asymmetry as Fairness: Reversing a Peremptory Trend, Anna Roberts, 92 Wash. U. L. Rev. 1503 (2015).

• Beyond Batson's Scrutiny: A Preliminary Look at Racial Disparities in Prosecutorial Preemptory Strikes Following the Passage of the North Carolina Racial Justice Act, Catherine Grosso and Barbara O’Brien, 46 U.C. Davis L. Rev. 1623 (2013).

• The Impact of Jury Race in Criminal Trials, Shamena Anwar, Patrick Bayer, and Randi Hjalmarsson, 127 Q.J.Econ. 1017,1021,1032 (2012).

• Illegal Racial Discrimination in Jury Selection: A Continuing Legacy, Equal Justice Initiative, 2010.

• On Racial Diversity and Group Decision Making: Identifying Multiple Effects of Racial Composition on Jury Deliberations, Samuel Sommers, J. Personality and Social Psychology, 2006, Vol. 90, No. 4, 597– 612 (2006).

• Race, Diversity, and Jury Composition: Battering and Bolstering Legitimacy, Lesia Ellis and Shari Siedman Diamond, 78 Chi.-Kent L. Rev. 1033 (2003).

 

Case Law

• People v. Ojeda Opinion (2021)

• People v. Silas, A150512 (Cal. Ct. App. Sep. 17, 2021) (Contra Costa, CA)(Reversing a conviction for racially discriminatory strikes based upon juror support of Black Lives Matter.)

• Flowers v. Mississippi, 588 U.S. ___ (2019) (Successful challenge of racially motivated strikes by the prosecution, based on a pattern of conduct over the course of 6 trials. In Sept. 2020 the state dropped the charges against Flowers.)

• Foster v. Chatman, 578 U.S. ___ (2016) (Successful challenge of racially motivated strikes by the prosecution, relying on after discovered evidence of prosecution team notes)

• Georgia v. McCollum, 505 U.S. 42 (1992) (holding the Constitution prohibits the defendant from engaging in purposeful racial discrimination in the exercise of peremptory challenges.)