Opinion
No. 121575.
October 17, 2003.
Leave to Appeal Denied.
No. 121575. The Court of Appeals majority concluded that six instances of ineffective assistance of trial counsel warranted reversal of defendant's conviction. The Supreme Court rejects the Court of Appeals majority's analysis regarding one of the six instances, i.e., its conclusion that defense counsel was ineffective for failing to request an all-Detroit jury. The federal constitution does not guarantee a jury of any particular racial composition, but only an impartial jury drawn from a fair cross-section of the community. There has been no showing that defendant's jury was not drawn from a fair cross-section of the community or that any racial group was systematically excluded. See Taylor v. Louisiana, 419 US 522 (1975); Holland v. Illinois, 493 US 474 (1990). The Court of Appeals majority improperly speculated about the jurors' racial characteristics and their ability to evaluate the issue of cross-racial identification. Court of Appeals No. 228653 (on remand).
I would grant the prosecutor's petition in order to decide whether the failure to request an all-Detroit jury constituted ineffective assistance of counsel. The prosecution's witness gave conflicting testimony about the race or ethnicity of the assailant. Defendant asserts that the witness had difficulty distinguishing whether the assailant was an Arab or a black. He argues that an all-Detroit jury would likely be more capable of assessing the reliability of the witness's identification of defendant, who is black, than a Wayne County jury. I disagree with the Court's decision to decide this complex and important issue without full briefing and oral argument.
CAVANAGH, J. I would deny leave to appeal without the further statement concerning the merits of the case.