Case law · Highest court · Federal

Hernandez v. New York

Decided
May 28, 1991
Docket
89-7645
Status
Published
Jurisdiction
Federal

Cited 4,168 timesDisapproved (not yet verified)Possible negative treatment: disapproved (not yet verified) · Ex Parte Bruner

What later courts said

  • holding that the disparate impact on a particular ethnic group of an asserted basis for exclusion is one indicator of discriminatory intent — State v. Edwards (2003)
  • holding that the findings of the trial court on discriminatory intent in Batson challenge are reviewed for clear error — Howard v. Moore (1997)
  • recognizing that exclusion of Latinos from jury based on ethnic origin would violate Equal Protection Clause — Wamget v. State (2001)

Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.

How the opinion begins

[*355] Justice Kennedy announced the judgment of the Court and delivered an opinion, in which The Chief Justice, Justice White and Justice Souter join.

Petitioner Dionisio Hernandez asks us to review the New York state courts’ rejection of his claim that the prosecutor in his criminal trial exercised peremptory challenges to exclude Latinos from the jury by reason of their ethnicity. If true, the prosecutor’s discriminatory use of peremptory strikes would violate the Equal Protection Clause as interpreted by our decision in Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U. S. 79 (1986). We must determine whether the prosecutor offered a race-neutral basis for challenging Latino potential jurors and, if so, whether the state courts’ decision to accept the prosecutor’s explanation should be sustained.

Petitioner and respondent both, use the term “Latino” in their briefs to this Court. The amicus brief employs instead the term “Hispanic,” and the parties referred to the excluded jurors by that term in the trial court. Both words appear in the state-court opinions. No attempt has been made at a distinction by the parties and we make no attempt to distinguish the terms in this opinion. We will refer to the excluded venirepersons as Latinos in deference to the terminology preferred by the parties before the Court. h — I The case comes to us on direct review of petitioner’s convictions on two counts of attempted murder and two counts of criminal possession of a weapon. On a Brooklyn street, petitioner fired several shots at Charlene Calloway and her mother, Ada Saline. Calloway suffered three gunshot wounds. Petitioner missed Saline and instead hit two men in a nearby restaurant. The victims survived the incident.

Statutes cited

Cite this

Hernandez v. New York, 500 U.S. 352 (1991)

Read the full opinion

Free account needed

Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.