Allegation of racial bias in Rowan County death penalty case cites Supreme Court decision

More than 60% of North Carolina’s death row inmates are people of color, even though the state’s population is more than 60% white. An ongoing legal challenge to a death penalty case in Rowan County is shining a spotlight on a 1980s U.S. Supreme Court ruling that prohibits the use of race as a reason to exclude jurors in trials.

Jacob Biba wrote about it in collaboration with The Garrison Project and is now with me.

Marshal Terry: So what kind of case is at stake in Rowan County, and what role does the Supreme Court decision, Batson v. Kentucky, play in it?

Jacob Biba: This case concerns the 1992 murder of an elderly white couple by three black men in Salisbury. One of the victims worked as a deputy sheriff, and racial tensions ran high in the lead-up to the trial. The Ku Klux Klan marched in downtown Salisbury to protest the murder. All three men were tried together and found guilty by an almost entirely white jury. Two of the men were sentenced to death, one to life in prison.

The Supreme Court’s decision in the Batson case comes into play because of the jury selection in that trial. Frank Chambers, one of the defendants sentenced to death, has argued since his trial that race played a significant role in the black jury strike in his case. Currently, his attorneys are focusing on the strikes of two black women, particularly at trial when they were rejected after Batson. The prosecutor cited the woman’s age, her hairstyle, lack of eye contact, and the fact that she was single, which he said indicated a lack of stability, as reasons for one of those strikes. Many of the reasons cited are often associated with historical stereotypes about black people. The prosecutor also said he hit her because she admitted that her black friends had criticized her for convicting the defendants, even though she had repeatedly said that it would not affect her decision. He also mentioned that she was physically attractive, as was one of the defendants. The prosecutor later admitted that he thought this might distract her from the proceedings, but he was not concerned that other women on the jury might be attracted to the defendant.

The judge ultimately ruled that the prosecutor did not violate Batson’s law in any of those cases, as did appeals courts in North Carolina in the years following the trial. But new evidence, particularly jury selection notes related to the race of the potential black jurors, was discovered, led to an evidentiary hearing in 2023 and is the reason Chambers’ claims are still being litigated in court 30 years later.

Terry cloth: I wanted to ask you: What arguments does Chambers make, and what evidence do you have, that racial discrimination was wrongly used as a reason for excluding jurors?

Chambers’ lawyers believe his case under Batson is exceptionally strong. The jury selection notes supported his claim, they believe, especially when coupled with the prosecutor’s testimony during last year’s hearing. Looking at some of the other cases appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court under Batson, Chambers’ lawyers believe his case meets all of those criteria and more. They point to the prosecutor’s pattern of denials, his racially distressed questioning and the prosecutor’s jury selection notes, which appeared to label black potential jurors and, in some cases, described their hairstyles. At last year’s hearing, the prosecutor admitted to writing a note using the word “race” to refer to one of the jurors and that the note was related to why she was excluded from the jury. Chambers’ lawyers believe this is particularly strong evidence.

Terry cloth: And what does the public prosecutor say now?

Biba: The state argues that Chambers’ claims are procedurally time-barred. Essentially, they say evidence like the jury selection notes were available to attorneys working on Chambers’ appeal as early as 1999, but one of his attorneys, who served as a judge in Rowan County after the conviction, testified last year that he never received those notes. But even if Chambers’ claims were not time-barred, the state continues to argue that they are without merit. They claim that race played no role in prosecutors’ rejection of those jurors.

Terry cloth: What is at stake here? Is the defense trying to get a retrial or just a new verdict?

Biba: They are trying to get a retrial. Chambers’ death sentence was already overturned due to an allegation of jury misconduct, so he will have a retrial to determine his verdict if he doesn’t get relief under Batson’s ruling. But a re-sentencing could allow prosecutors to seek the death penalty again.

Terry cloth: How often is this Supreme Court decision, Batson v. Kentucky, used to challenge convictions? And have other North Carolina cases been challenged on this basis?

Biba: North Carolina has had quite a few cases appealed under the Batson Act, but the courts have only overturned one conviction as a result, and that was in 2022. Until then, North Carolina was one of the few states in the South that had not overturned a conviction under the Batson Act, which I believe was an embarrassment to many attorneys practicing there.

Terry cloth: Death row inmates in North Carolina had the opportunity to appeal their convictions under the Racial Justice Act of 2009 if they could prove that racial bias played a role in their conviction. But the law was repealed after just a few years. Why was it repealed and what options do inmates have now?

Biba: Well, the law was passed when Democrats controlled the General Assembly, but when Republicans soon took control, they weakened the law. They eventually repealed it in 2013, believing it would effectively abolish the death penalty in the state. But in the four years it was law, more than 100 people filed lawsuits under the RJA and four people actually received appeals and were sentenced to life in prison without parole. But with that repeal, those four people were re-sentenced to death and all of the lawsuits were in a sort of legal limbo for the next seven years or so.

In 2020, the state Supreme Court ruled that the lawsuits filed before the repeal could proceed, and the four people who originally received compensation were re-sentenced to life in prison without parole. Now, this past spring, the first RJA hearing since the 2020 decision was held. Closing arguments from that hearing should be held soon, and a judge will issue a decision. This case is considered a bellwether and could be a sign of how other lawsuits related to the RJA could play out in the future.

In addition, death penalty opponents are urging Governor Cooper to clear death row inmates and commute sentences before he leaves office. There have been no executions in North Carolina since 2006, but there are fears that executions could resume if Mark Robinson is elected governor and Dan Bishop is elected attorney general.

Terry cloth: And these are the Republicans who are running for these offices. Now let’s get back to Chambers and his case. What happens now? You mentioned that his death sentence was overturned. But what happens to his case overall?

Biba: Right now, at the evidentiary hearing last year, the trial judge ruled against Chambers, so his lawyers have filed a petition with the state Supreme Court seeking review. But given the makeup of the court in its recent decisions related to Batson, I think the likelihood of a majority of the justices ruling in his favor, even if the court agrees to hear the case, is slim.

I think this case will probably end up in the U.S. Supreme Court.