Non-unanimous verdicts at issue at Louisiana high court
Louisiana’s Supreme Court is preparing to hear arguments on whether a ban on non-unanimous jury verdicts must apply retroactively
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Louisiana’s Supreme Court hears arguments Tuesday on whether a ban on non-unanimous jury verdicts must apply retroactively, a case that criminal justice advocates say would affect an estimated 1,500 people convicted before the U.S. Supreme Court prohibited such verdicts.
The case centers on Reginald Reddick, who was convicted of murder by a 10-2 jury vote in 1997. A judge in Louisiana's Plaquemines Parish overturned the verdict. Prosecutors have appealed.
Attorneys seeking to uphold the judge say most of those who will be affected by the case are Black. And they stress that laws allowing verdicts of 10-2 or 11-1 were rooted in Jim Crow era efforts to make convicting Black people easier.
In 2018, Louisiana voters approved a constitutional amendment that outlawed non-unanimous verdicts in trials for crimes committed after Jan. 1, 2019, vote that followed a Pulitzer Prize-winning series of stories in The Advocate analyzing the origins of the law and the racial disparities in verdicts.
In 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that non-unanimous verdicts were unconstitutional, broadening the effect of the state constitutional amendment.
But, in 2021, the Supreme Court made clear that the decision against non-unanimous verdicts applied only to future cases and cases in which the defendants’ appeals had not been exhausted.
The Reddick case is one of two arising form the ban on non-unanimous verdicts. The second comes in the case of Ronald Gasser, who was convicted of manslaughter by a non-unanimous jury. Gasser had originally been charged with the murder of New Orleans football star and former NFL player Joe McKnight.
His conviction was thrown out because of the non-unanimous verdict. The question before the high court Tuesday is whether prosecutors can try him again for murder. Gasser's defense attorneys say that amounts to double jeopardy and Jefferson Parish prosecutors must be limited to trying him for manslaughter. Gasser pleaded not guilty in the case and insisted he shot McKnight in self-defense.