Peña-Rodriguez v. Colorado
| Peña-Rodriguez v. Colorado | |
|---|---|
| Argued October 11, 2016 Decided March 6, 2017 | |
| Full case name | Miguel Angel Peña-Rodriguez, Petitioner v. State of Colorado |
| Docket no. | 15-606 |
| Citations | 580 U.S. ___ (more) 137 S. Ct. 855; 197 L. Ed. 2d 107 |
| Opinion announcement | Opinion announcement |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Pena-Rodriguez v. People, 2015 CO 31, 350 P.3d 287; cert. granted, 136 S. Ct. 1513 (2016). |
| Holding | |
| The Sixth Amendment requires an exception to the no-impeachment rule when a juror makes a clear statement indicating reliance on racial stereotypes or animus to convict a criminal defendant. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Kennedy, joined by Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan |
| Dissent | Thomas |
| Dissent | Alito, joined by Roberts, Thomas |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. Amend. VI | |
Peña-Rodriguez v. Colorado, 580 U.S. ___ (2017), was a United States Supreme Court decision holding that the Sixth Amendment requires a racial bias exception to the no-impeachment rule. According to two jurors, a third juror made a number of biased statements about the defendant's Mexican ethnicity, stating, "I think he did it because he’s Mexican and Mexican men take whatever they want." In a 5–3 vote, the Court held that, notwithstanding a state evidentiary rule, the trial court must be permitted to consider the two jurors' testimony.