The unanimous decision upheld the verdict against Michael Rivera, who was found guilty of shooting Marcus Lee, 16, in the back of the head on Jan. 10, 1998, because he mistakenly thought that the victim was a member of a rival gang.
After the shooting, court records recount, Mr. Rivera bragged to fellow members of his gang, the “Insane Deuces,” of gunning down a youth he thought was a member of the “Stones.”
When the jury was being picked, the defense sought to disqualify a black woman on the ground that she was the same race as the victim, and that she worked at Cook County Hospital, sometimes helping to check in patients and therefore occasionally coming into contact with gunshot victims — factors that the defense argued might prejudice her against Mr. Rivera.
There was no reason to dismiss the juror for cause — that is, she did not know anyone connected to the case, nor was there any conflict of interest or other specific reason that would have disqualified her virtually automatically — so the defense lawyer sought to use a peremptory challenge.
But the trial judge refused to disqualify the juror, who became forewoman on the panel, because he thought to do so might violate the Supreme Court’s landmark 1986 ruling in Batson v. Kentucky, which declared it unconstitutional to use peremptory challenges to exclude jurors based on race, ethnicity or gender.
The Illinois Supreme Court found that the trial judge had erred, although “in good faith,” in not allowing the peremptory challenge. Nevertheless, the state high court said, the defendant got a fair trial and was not entitled to a reversal of the verdict just because his peremptory challenge was erroneously denied.
The United States Supreme Court agreed on Tuesday in Rivera v. Illinois, 07-9995. “In sum,” Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote for the court, “Rivera received precisely what due process required: a fair trial before an impartial and properly instructed jury, which found him guilty of every element of the charged offense.”