Douglas

People v. Douglas

Good Law
22 Cal. App. 5th 1162·232 Cal. Rptr. 3d 305
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 3, 2018C072881California9,761 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Duarte, J.

*307 *1164 This case is about fairness and equality in our criminal justice system. When a party exercises a peremptory challenge against a prospective *1165 juror for an invidious reason, the fact that the party may also have had one or more legitimate reasons for challenging that juror does not eliminate the taint to the process. We reject the application in these circumstances of the so-called "mixed motive" or "dual motive" analysis, which arose in employment discrimination cases as a way for defendant-employers to show that they would have taken an adverse action against a plaintiff-employee whether or not an impermissible factor also animated the employment decision. We hold it is not appropriate to use that test when considering the remedy for invidious discrimination in jury selection, which should be free of any bias.

INTRODUCTION

After defendant Brady Dee Douglas's former boyfriend, a male prostitute, told him victim Jeffrey B. had shorted him money following a prearranged sexual encounter, defendant and codefendant Clifton Damarcus Sharpe tracked down Jeffrey and demanded payment. During a high-speed freeway chase, defendant pointed a gun at Jeffrey and shot at his…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.