TURNER V. MURRAY 476 U.S. 28 (1986) CASE BRIEF

TURNER V. MURRAY

476 U.S. 28 (1986)

NATURE OF THE CASE: Turner (D), a black man, sought a writ of certiorari affirming the denial of a petition for habeas corpus relief following his capital murder conviction.

FACTS: D entered a jewelry store armed with a sawed-off shotgun. He demanded that the proprietor, W. Jack Smith, Jr., put jewelry and money from the cash register into some jewelry bags. Smith complied with D's demand, but triggered a silent alarm, alerting the Police Department. When Alan Bain, a police officer, arrived to inquire about the alarm, D surprised him and forced him to surrender his revolver. D then became agitated. He fired toward the rear wall of the store and stated that if he saw or heard any more police officers, he was going to start killing those in the store. When a police siren sounded, D walked to where Smith was stationed behind a counter and without warning shot him in the head with Bain's pistol, wounding Smith and causing him to slump incapacitated to the floor. Officer Bain attempted to calm D, promising to take him anywhere he wanted to go and asking him not to shoot again. D fired two pistol shots into Smith's chest, fatally wounding him. As D turned away from shooting Smith, Bain was able to disarm him and place him under arrest. D was indicted on charges of capital murder, use of a firearm in the commission of a murder, and possession of a sawed-off shotgun in the commission of a robbery. D's counsel submitted to the trial judge a list of proposed questions, including a question whether the fact that D was a Negro, and Smith was a white would prejudice you against D. The judge declined to ask this question. The jury that was empanelled, which consisted of eight whites and four blacks. D was convicted on all of the charges against him. After a separate sentencing hearing on the capital charge, the jury recommended that petitioner be sentenced to death, a recommendation the trial judge accepted. D appealed. D argued that the trial judge deprived him of his constitutional right to a fair and impartial jury by refusing to question prospective jurors on racial prejudice. The Virginia Supreme Court rejected this argument. D then sought habeas corpus relief. It was denied and the court of appeals affirmed. The Supreme Court granted certiorari to review the Fourth Circuit's decision that D was not constitutionally entitled to have potential jurors questioned concerning racial prejudice.

ISSUE:

RULE OF LAW:

HOLDING AND DECISION:

LEGAL ANALYSIS:

Get free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online

for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.

https://bsmsphd.com

© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner