Berghuis v. Smith

The Supreme Court has agreed to decide whether a man's murder conviction should have been thrown out because there were too few African-Americans in a county's jury pool.

In 1993, Diapolis Smith was convicted of second-degree murder by an all-white jury in Kent County, Mich.

Smith has since argued that his constitutional rights were violated because there were only three African-Americans in the 60- to 100-person pool of prospective jurors. None of them made it into the final 37 considered for his trial's panel.

He argued that Kent County's prospective jurors in 1993 were routinely excused because of child care, a lack of transportation or a conflict with work. Smith also said African-Americans in Grand Rapids were being diverted to jury duty in a city court, which took them off the rolls for a year.

Last September, a three-judge panel on the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals tossed out the conviction, arguing that the decisions, which resulted in fewer African-Americans being eligible for service on circuit court juries was akin to "systematic exclusion."

County and state officials have maintained that Smith, who was convicted for shooting and killing Christopher Rumbley during a 1991 barroom brawl, received a fair trial.

Seven other states joined Michigan in asking the high court to review the case.

On Sept. 30, the justices granted the petition for certiorari. Oral arguments are expected to be held sometime early next year.

Question presented: Whether the Sixth Circuit erred in concluding that the Michigan Supreme Court failed to apply “clearly established Federal law” under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 when it rejected a state prisoner’s Sixth Amendment fair cross-section claim and whether the Sixth Circuit erred in applying the comparative-disparity test (for evaluating the difference between the numbers of African Americans in the community as compared to the venires).