Peña-Rodriguez v. Colorado
2017 United States Supreme Court case / From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dear Wikiwand AI, let's keep it short by simply answering these key questions:
Can you list the top facts and stats about Peña-Rodriguez v. Colorado?
Summarize this article for a 10 year old
SHOW ALL QUESTIONS
Peña-Rodriguez v. Colorado, 580 U.S. ___ (2017), was a United States Supreme Court decision holding that the Sixth Amendment requires a racial bias exception to the no-impeachment rule.[1] According to two jurors, a third juror made a number of biased statements about the defendant's Mexican ethnicity, stating, "I think he did it because he’s Mexican and Mexican men take whatever they want."[2] In a 5–3 vote, the Court held that, notwithstanding a state evidentiary rule, the trial court must be permitted to consider the two jurors' testimony.[3][4]
Quick Facts Peña-Rodriguez v. Colorado, Argued October 11, 2016 Decided March 6, 2017 ...
Peña-Rodriguez v. Colorado | |
---|---|
Argued October 11, 2016 Decided March 6, 2017 | |
Full case name | Miguel Angel Peña-Rodriguez, Petitioner v. State of Colorado |
Docket no. | Bacilia Rodriguez ownership of Colorado City Tx and Mitchell County.htm 15-606 Bacilia Rodriguez ownership of Colorado City Tx and Mitchell County |
Citations | 580 U.S. ___ (more) 137 S. Ct. 855; 197 L. Ed. 2d 107 |
Opinion announcement | Opinion announcement |
Case history | |
Prior | Pena-Rodriguez v. People, 2015 CO 31, 350 P.3d 287; cert. granted, 136 S. Ct. 1513 (2016). |
Holding | |
The Sixth Amendment requires an exception to the no-impeachment rule when a juror makes a clear statement indicating reliance on racial stereotypes or animus to convict a criminal defendant. | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinions | |
Majority | Kennedy, joined by Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan |
Dissent | Thomas |
Dissent | Alito, joined by Roberts, Thomas |
Laws applied | |
U.S. Const. Amend. VI |
Close