Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Racism; Racist; Peña-Rodriguez v. Colorado; Racial Bias; Evidence; Evidentiary; Racial Disparity; BIPOC; Implicit Bias; Explicit Bias; United States v. Shalout; Criminal Defendant; Jury Deliberations; Vaise v. Delaval; Mansfield Rule; McDonald v. Pless; Tanner v. United States; United States v. Reid; Mattox v. United States; Warger v. Shauers; Iowa Rule; Wright v. Illinois & Mississippi Telegraph Co.; United States v. Smith; Harden v. Hillman; State v. Berhe; United States v. Brooks; United States v. Birchette; Commonwealth v. Ralph R.; State v. Spates
Articles 1 - 1 of 1
Full-Text Articles in Law
What Counts As ‘Racist Enough?’: A Clearer Standard For New Trials When Jurors Demonstrate Racial Bias, Priyadarshini Das
What Counts As ‘Racist Enough?’: A Clearer Standard For New Trials When Jurors Demonstrate Racial Bias, Priyadarshini Das
Journal of Law and Policy
The no-impeachment rule, Federal Rule of Evidence 606(b), necessitates that jurors keep their deliberations secret. However, in the 2017 Supreme Court case Peña-Rodriguez v. Colorado, the Court created a racial bias exception to the no-impeachment rule. This exception allows jurors to notify the court when “one or more jurors made statements exhibiting overt racial bias that cast serious doubt on the fairness and impartiality of the jury’s deliberations and resulting verdict.” This Note argues that this standard is too narrow because it fails to consider several situations of racial bias, like implicit bias. The ineffectiveness of this exception is demonstrated …