"Be Fair - Death row appeal tests equality under law," is the title of the editorial in today's Fayetteville Observer.
Marcus Robinson, formerly of Cumberland County and now residing on North Carolina's death row, is a killer. That's not in dispute. Neither is his conviction for first-degree murder. His isn't that kind of appeal.
In fact, if someone were to come forward and testify that exculpatory evidence had been suppressed, that testimony would be evaluated in a trial court, not the court that is hearing his appeal under the 2009 Racial Justice Act.
If he fails in this action, he will remain on death row. If he succeeds, he'll be moved to another part of the prison and live out his life there. The Racial Justice Act provides no third outcome.
The burden of proof is on Robinson, whose case will be rebutted by the state; and what he must prove to the court's satisfaction is that race played a significant part in the decision to seek or impose a death sentence.
Now that we're clear on what Robinson's appeal is not about, take a closer look at what promises to be an interesting first test of the new law.
We don't know the facts, but this case could have been chosen for its simplicity, meaning its lack of side issues and other encumbrances.
And:
The questions are important because some of Robinson's evidence is powerful - not mere numerical disparities, but disparities so dramatic that scholars calculating odds and probabilities placed them outside the realm of mere chance. An example: peremptory strikes that effectively excluded qualified blacks from juries at a rate more than twice the exclusion rate for qualified white juror prospects.
Robinson has had his trial. This one could prove to be ours.
Earlier coverage of North Carolina's Racial Justice Act begins at the link.
Comments