Quantcast
Channel: CourtListener.com Custom Search Feed
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 20

Williams v. State

$
0
0

125 P.3d 627 (2005) Gary Jerome WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Nevada, Respondent. No. 43041. Supreme Court of Nevada. December 29, 2005. Philip J. Kohn, Public Defender, and Mark S. Blaskey, Craig D. Creel, Amy Dreifus Coffee, and Brigid Hoffman, Deputy Public Defenders, Clark County, for Appellant. George Chanos, Attorney General, Carson City; David J. Roger, District Attorney, James Tufteland, Chief Deputy District Attorney, and Roy L. Nelson III, Deputy District Attorney, Clark County, for Respondent. Before DOUGLAS, ROSE and PARRAGUIRRE, JJ. *629 OPINION ROSE, J. In this appeal, we decide whether the district court's dismissal of multiple jury venires was error, whether a subsequent venire cured those errors, and whether the district court erred when it allowed the State to impeach the defendant regarding a conviction for a crime committed when he was seventeen years old. After a trial, a jury selected from the third venire convicted Gary Jerome Williams of the battery of Robin Swope. Before trial, the district court denied Williams' motion to suppress his conviction for aggravated robbery, which occurred in 1985 when he was a juvenile. During jury selection, the district court dismissed the first venire because it did not reflect the racial makeup of Clark County, Nevada. As a remedy, the district court directed the jury commissioner to specifically include African Americans in the next venire. The district court dismissed the second venire because the State was concerned over the randomness of the venire's selection since three of the first twelve jurors were African Americans. Neither Williams nor the State objected to the composition of the third venire. We conclude that the district court erred when it dismissed the second venire because no evidence in the record establishes that the second venire was not randomly selected and because the State's objection reveals a racial motive for dismissing the venire. The district court's order for a third venire was insufficient to cure the State's racial bias present in the dismissal of the second venire. We also conclude that the district court abused its discretion in allowing the State to impeach Williams with his conviction when he was a juvenile. Therefore, we reverse and remand for a new trial. FACTS On June 22, 2003, Robin Swope, a male Caucasian, and Gary Jerome Williams, a male African American, were involved in an altercation in and around the parking lot of the Wild Wild West Casino-Motel in Las Vegas, Nevada. Swope and his children were staying at the motel that night. Swope confronted Williams after he saw Williams speaking with Swope's thirteen-year-old daughter. Details of the altercation were highly disputed at trial, including who was the first aggressor, who produced a knife with an emblem of a confederate flag, and whether Swope called Williams a "nigger." Williams was arrested and charged with attempted murder with use of a deadly weapon and battery with use of a deadly weapon resulting in substantial bodily harm. Following trial, a jury selected from the third venire found Williams guilty of battery …


Original document ES

Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 20

Trending Articles