Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

389 U.S. 24

88 S. Ct. 4

19 L. Ed. 2d 25

Docket No. 174, Misc.

Jones v. Georgia

Supreme Court of the United States · decided 1967-10-16

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

““Under such a system the opportunity for discrimination was present and we cannot say on this record that it was not resorted to by the commissioners. Indeed, the disparity between the percentage of Negroes on the tax digest (27.1%) and that of the grand jury venire (9.1%) and the petit jury venire (7.8%) strongly points to this conclusion. Although the system of selection used here had been specifically condemned by the Court of Appeals, the State offered no testimony as to why it was continued on retrial. The State offered no explanation for the disparity between the percentage of Negroes on the tax digest and those on the venires, although the digest must have included the names of large numbers of ‘upright and intelligent’ Negroes as the statutory qualification required. In any event the State failed to offer any testimony indicating that the 27.1% of Negroes on the tax digest were not fully qualified. The State, therefore, failed to meet the burden of rebutting the petitioners’ prima facie case.””

quoted by 1 later decision, including State v. Cornell

Relies on Norris v. State of Alabama · Whitus v. State of Georgia Whitus · Avery v. State of Georgia

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Reversed and remanded · 9–0 · Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1967-10-16

How this case has been cited

Cited by 353 later decisions (30 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2023 · most notably Batson v. Kentucky (1986), Tollett v. Henderson (1973)

116 federal appellate · 11 district · 117 state decisions — followed in 26 states

14701967197019801990200020102020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Wilbur D. Owens, Jr., for petitioner.

Arthur K. Bolton, Atty. Gen. of Georgia, G. Ernest Tidwell, Executive Asst. Atty. Gen., and Marion O. Gordon, Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

¶1

The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for a writ of certiorari are granted.

¶2

Petitioner appealed his conviction for murder to the Georgia Supreme Court where he sought reversal on the ground, among others, that the evidence relevant to his claim of systematic exclusion of Negroes from the grand and petit juries drawn in the county established a prima facie case of the denial of equal protection within our decision in Whitus v. State of Georgia, 385 U.S. 545, 87 S.Ct. 643, 17 L.Ed.2d 599.* The Georgia Supreme Court affirmed the conviction stating that Whitus was distinguishable because 'public officers are presumed to have discharged their sworn official duties. … Under the testimony in this case we cannot assume that the jury commissioners did not eliminate prospective jurors on the basis of their competency to serve, rather than because of racial discrimination.' 223 Ga. 157, 162, 154 S.E.2d 228, 232.

¶3

We hold that the burden upon the State to explain 'the disparity between the percentage of Negroes on the tax digest and those on the venires,' Whitus, supra, 385 U.S. at 552, 87 S.Ct. at 647, was not met by the Georgia Supreme Court's reliance on the stated presumptions. See Arnold v. North Carolina, 376 U.S. 773, 84 S.Ct. 1032, 12 L.Ed.2d 77; Eubanks v. State of Louisiana, 356 U.S. 584, 78 S.Ct. 970, 2 L.Ed.2d 991; Williams v. State of Georgia, 349 U.S. 375, 75 S.Ct. 814, 99 L.Ed. 1161; Avery v. State of Georgia, 345 U.S. 559, 73 S.Ct. 891, 97 L.Ed. 1244; Cassell v. State of Texas, 339 U.S. 282, 70 S.Ct. 629, 94 L.Ed. 839; Norris v. State of Alabama, 294 U.S. 587, 55 S.Ct. 579, 79 L.Ed. 1074. We therefore reverse the judgment of the Georgia Supreme Court and remand for further proceedings not inconsistent with our opinion.

¶4

It is so ordered.

¶5

Reversed and remanded.

*

The record supports the following comparison of the salient facts in Whitus and in petitioner's case:

Whitus Petitioner's case

Over 21 population 42.6% Negro men 30.7% Negro

Jury Commissioners White (apparently) White

Source of juror Tax Digests separated 3 Tax Digests, two of

names and identified as to race which separated and

identified as to race

Taxpayers 27.1% Negro 197% Negro

Negro jurors 9.1% grand jury venire 5.0% of jury list and box

7.8% petit jury venire

(1 Negro was on the

grand jury which

indicted petitioner)

Rebuttal evidence

by State None None

/389/us/24 · .json · Public domain