Newman v. State

4 Citing cases

  1. Newman v. State

    667 So. 2d 137 (Ala. 1993)   Cited 3 times

    In reversing, the Court of Criminal Appeals held that the state's strike of veniremember number 90 was "virtually indistinguishable from two of the strikes held to constitute reversible error in Walker v. State, 611 So.2d 1133 (Ala.Crim.App. 1992)." Newman v. State, 667 So.2d 132, 133-134 (Ala.Crim.App. 1992). In Walker, the Court of Criminal Appeals reversed the judgment because it found that the basis for striking the veniremembers was the state's "suspicion" that they were related to someone with a recorded criminal history, although the state asked no questions to confirm this suspicion, or the veniremembers' failure to answer on voir dire a question regarding whether they were related to someone who had been prosecuted for a felony, when in fact, others had also failed to answer.

  2. Newman v. Hetzel

    1:10-CV-811-ID (WO) (M.D. Ala. Nov. 30, 2010)

    After the Court of Criminal Appeals overruled the State's application for rehearing on January 22, 1993, the State sought certiorari review in the Alabama Supreme Court. See Newman v. State, 667 So.2d 132 (1993). On May 21, 1993 the Alabama Supreme Court reversed and remanded the Court of Criminal Appeals' November 25, 1992 decision, concluding that the State had not committed a Batson violation.

  3. David v. State

    740 So. 2d 1142 (Ala. Crim. App. 1998)   Cited 4 times

    However, ordinarily, parties should not be expected to risk embarrassing or alienating prospective jurors by pressing them during general voir dire with questions concerning criminal records. See Newman v. State, 667 So.2d 132, 135 (Ala.Cr.App. 1992) (Bowen, P.J., dissenting), Judge Bowen's dissenting opinion adopted by the Alabama Supreme Court in Newman v. State, 667 So.2d 137 (Ala. 1993); see also Wilsher v. State, 611 So.2d 1175, 1183 (Ala.Cr.App. 1992). Further, although the trial court should not accept a reason that has been proffered for a peremptory strike at "face value," it is not a per se abuse of discretion for the trial court to assume that the proponent of the strike, usually an officer of the court, has been truthful and accurate when giving its reasons for a strike.

  4. Newman v. State

    728 So. 2d 672 (Ala. Crim. App. 1998)   Cited 1 times

    On November 25, 1992, this court, in a 3-2 decision, reversed Newman's conviction, finding that the state had violated Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986), in its use of its peremptory challenges. Newman v. State, 667 So.2d 132 (Ala.Cr.App. 1992). On May 21, 1993, however, the Alabama Supreme Court reversed this court's judgment and remanded the case to this court.