Constitutional Law Reporter
Award
Menu
  • Home
  • US Constitution
  • Supreme court cases
  • Justices
    • Chief Justices
    • Current Supreme Court Justices
    • Past US Supreme Court Justices
  • American Biographies
  • Articles
    • Current Cases
    • Historical Cases
    • Impeachment
  • Videos
  • Links
Hot-Topics

April 18, 2018 | Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments in Six Cases

Buck v Davis: Racial Bias & Sixth Amendment Might Reverse Death Sentence

In Buck v Davis, 580 U. S. ____ (2017), the U.S. Supreme Court recently held that a death row inmate was likely prejudiced by expert witness testimony offered by his own defense team that suggested he was more likely to be dangerous in the future because he was black. Accordingly, the majority held Duane Buck is entitled to a new sentencing hearing.

Facts of Buck v Davis

Duane Buck was convicted of capital murder in a Texas court. Under state law, the jury was permitted to impose a death sentence only if it found unanimously and beyond a reasonable doubt that Buck was likely to commit acts of violence in the future.

Buck’s attorney called a psychologist, Dr. Walter Quijano, to offer his opinion on that issue. Dr. Quijano considered several statistical factors, including Buck’s race. Although Dr. Quijano ultimately concluded that Buck was unlikely to be a future danger, his report and oral testimony stated that Buck was statistically more likely to act violently because he is black. The jury returned a sentence of death. In several post-conviction proceedings, Buck argued that his attorney’s introduction of the evidence violated his Sixth Amendment right to the effective assistance of counsel.

Majority Decision in Buck v Davis

By a vote of 6-2, the Supreme Court sided with Buck and held that he is entitled to a new sentencing hearing. Chief Justice John Roberts authored the majority opinion.

The majority concluded that Buck demonstrated ineffective assistance of counsel.

Dr. Quijano’s testimony “said, in effect, that the color of Buck’s skin made him more deserving of execution,” the Chief Justice wrote. “No competent defense attorney would introduce such evidence about his own client.”

The Court further concluded that Buck demonstrated that he suffered prejudice. “But our holding on prejudice makes clear that Buck may have been sentenced to death in part because of his race. As an initial matter, this is a disturbing departure from a basic premise of our criminal justice system: Our law punishes people for what they do, not who they are,” Chief Justice Roberts wrote.

He added: “When a jury hears expert testimony that expressly makes a defendant’s race directly pertinent on the question of life or death, the impact of that evidence cannot be measured simply by how much air time it received at trial or how many pages it occupies in the record. Some toxins can be deadly in small doses.”

Dissent in Buck v Davis

Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. They argued that there was ample evidence to justify the death penalty, citing the horrific nature of the crime and Buck’s complete lack of remorse. “The facts leave no doubt that this crime was premeditated and cruel,” they wrote.

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW ARTICLES

Hall v Hall: Consolidated Cases Remain Independent for Appeal
by DONALD SCARINCI on April 11, 2018

In Hall v Hall, 584 U. S. ____ (2018), the U.S. Supreme Court held that consolidated cases remain in...

Read More
Marinello v United States: IRS “Omnibus Clause” Requires Nexus for Tax Obstruction
by DONALD SCARINCI on April 5, 2018

In Marinello v United States, 584 U. S. ____ (2018), the U.S. Supreme Court held that prosecutors mu...

Read More
Conditions for Land Use Approvals Require a Nexus to the Property
by DONALD SCARINCI on April 3, 2018

In Koontz v St Johns River Water, 133 S.Ct. 2586 (2013), the U.S. Supreme Court held that government...

Read More
All Posts

The Amendments

  • Amendment1
    • Establishment ClauseFree Exercise Clause
    • Freedom of Speech
    • Freedoms of Press
    • Freedom of Assembly, and Petitition
    Read More
  • Amendment2
    • The Right to Bear Arms
    Read More
  • Amendment4
    • Unreasonable Searches and Seizures
    Read More
  • Amendment5
    • Due Process
    • Eminent Domain
    • Rights of Criminal Defendants
    Read More

Preamble to the Bill of Rights

Congress of the United States begun and held at the City of New-York, on Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine.

THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.

Read More

More Recent Posts

  • Conditions for Land Use Approvals Require a Nexus to the Property
  • Stop the Beach Renourishment v Florida Department of Environmental Protection: Littoral Rights in Florida are Protected
  • Kelo v New London: Taking Land for Private Development Doesn’t Violate Constitution
  • Franklin Delano Roosevelt's Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

Constitutional Law

Constitutional Law Tweets

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REPORTER RSS FEED

Hill on the Ideological Origins of the Rule of Law
26 April 2018 - Lawrence Solum

Peter J. Hill (Wheaton College) has posted The Ideological Origins of the Rule of Law (Presented at [...]

Shapiro & Verchick on Distributional Effects of Environmental Regulation
26 April 2018 - Lawrence Solum

Sidney A. Shapiro (Wake Forest University School of Law) & Robert R. M. Verchick (Loyola Univers [...]

Thursday round-up
26 April 2018 - Edith Roberts

Yesterday the Supreme Court wrapped up its last session of the term with oral argument in one of thi [...]

Ruben & Blocher on Empirical Study of the Second Amendment after Heller
26 April 2018 - Lawrence Solum

Eric Ruben (New York University School of Law; Brennan Center for Justice) & Joseph Blocher (Duk [...]

Blecher-Prigat on Contested Parentage & Relationships Between Prospective Parents
26 April 2018 - Lawrence Solum

Ayelet Blecher-Prigat (The Academic College for Law & Science) has posted Conceiving Parents (Ha [...]

Editor

Donald Scarinci

Managing Partner

Scarinci Hollenbeck

(201) 806-3364

Constitutional Law Reporter

Follow me

© 2016 Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC. All rights reserved.

Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Attorney Advertising