The Oregon Supreme Court has let stand a ruling that sets a new judicial test in the state for determining whether potential jurors have been excluded because of their race.
The new standard, known as a “comparative juror analysis,” was used by the Oregon Appeals Court in July to determine that Multnomah County prosecutors had dismissed two members of a juror pool because they were Black — the same race as a defendant accused of murder.
The appellate ruling overturned the conviction of Darian McWoods, who was sentenced to life in prison in 2018 after being found guilty of murder by abuse in the death of his 15-month-old daughter, Kamaya Flores.
In a recent statement, Multnomah County District Attorney Mike Schmidt said he was “disappointed” the Oregon Supreme Court had skipped its chance to review the appellate ruling but vowed to prosecute McWoods again.
“The McWoods decision has created confusion in the law that our prosecutors are struggling to navigate,” Schmidt said. “Further clarification from the highest court on behalf of the state and defense on a topic this important in the administration of justice is sorely lacking.”
During McWoods’ trial, lead prosecutor Amity Girt and second chair Amanda Nadell offered race-neutral reasons to strike the two Black prosecutive jurors: In their responses to a questionnaire, one of the jurors had stated that police officers often lie, while the other had said innocent people are frequently convicted in the criminal justice system, according to the appellate court ruling.
The trial judge accepted these arguments and allowed both strikes to proceed.
The appeals court conducted its own investigation and found that other jurors who weren’t dismissed had given similar answers to the questions. They therefore determined that the prosecutors’ stated rationale to strike the two Black jurors was a guise.
In a petition for review to the state Supreme Court, Oregon Department of Justice lawyers cried foul — arguing the appeals judges should have shown “deference” to the trial court’s weighing of the evidence rather than conducting their own investigation.
“(The appeals court’s) adoption of a comparative juror analysis merits this court’s review — particularly because the Court of Appeals has struggled to apply that analysis consistently,” Assistant Attorney General Jonathan Schildt wrote.
The Supreme Court declined to hear the case Dec. 15 but didn’t explain why.
In Multnomah County, Schmidt issued a new policy earlier this month requiring all prosecutors to conduct their own analysis of juror questionnaire responses before using a no-cause strike to eliminate any prospective juror from a protected class, such as race, religion or gender identity.
Schmidt said the proposal was in the works before the appeals court handed down the McWoods reversal and was largely crafted by Nadell, who now heads the office’s misdemeanor trial unit.
“I entrust Senior Deputy District Attorney Amanda Nadell with the task of training incoming attorneys in our office, due in part to her commitment to fairness and racial equity and due to her legal acumen,” Schmidt said.
McWoods, now 30, remains in state prison. No new trial date has been set.
— Zane Sparling; zsparling@oregonian.com; 503-319-7083; @pdxzane
Our journalism needs your support. Please become a subscriber today at OregonLive.com/subscribe
Ad Choices