State v. HollisAnnotate this Case
The Supreme Judicial Court held that the trial court did not err in determining that the State did not engage in purposeful discrimination when it used a peremptory challenge that excluded from the jury the sole person of color in the jury pool.
The Supreme Judicial Court affirmed the judgment of conviction entered in the Unified Criminal Docket convicting Defendant of reckless conduct with a dangerous weapon and criminal threatening with a dangerous weapon. On appeal, Defendant, who described himself as an African American male, argued that the State engaged in purposeful discrimination when it peremptorily challenged the juror at issue. The Supreme Judicial Court disagreed, holding that the trial court did not err when it determined that the prosecutor did not engage in purposeful discrimination.