The Louisiana Supreme Court heard oral arguments this week about whether a U.S. Supreme Court’s finding that non-unanimous jury verdicts are unconstitutional should apply retroactively to 1,500 Louisiana inmates.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in April 2020 in Ramos v. Louisiana that non-unanimous jury verdicts violate criminal defendants’ rights under the Sixth Amendment, but the high court did not hold that the decision should be applied to past convictions.
The New Orleans-based Promise of Justice Initiative (PJI) called on the justices to give the Louisiana residents serving sentences after being convicted by non-unanimous “Jim Crow” juries a chance at a fair verdict. But the Louisiana Attorney General’s Office argued that these prisoners’ non-unanimous verdicts were not discriminatory and should be final.
“If this court decides Ramos should apply retroactively, it will flood the criminal justice system with hundreds of old cases,” a brief filed by the state Attorney General’s Office states. “Evidence deteriorates, memories fade and witnesses become unavailable over time. It will be difficult – if not impossible – for the state to retry these cases.”
The federal court has decided that new procedural rules would never be decided retroactively, according to the office, and the state courts should follow that example.
But PJI called on the Louisiana Supreme Court to take a stand against what it says were discriminatory jury verdicts in the past.
“Convictions are constitutionally required to be decided by a unanimous jury of 12 peers,” Mercedes Montagnes, PJI’s executive director, said in a statement emailed to the Louisiana Record. “It’s past time for our 1,500 community members convicted by non-unanimous juries to get a fair shot at justice.”
The Pelican Institute for Public Policy filed an amicus brief supporting the retroactive application of the Ramos decision, contending that retroactivity was foundationally important to the spirit of the unanimity rule.
“In 2018, a supermajority of Louisianans voted to amend the (state) constitution to require jury unanimity,” the brief filed in the case now before the state Supreme Court, Reddick v. Louisiana, says. “Whatever framework this court adopts, it should be one that vindicates a right that so many Louisiana voters believed important enough to enshrine in the Louisiana constitution.”