Filed: Sep. 06, 2003
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 94-10302 Summary Calendar _ JOHNNY LOGAN HICKS, Petitioner-Appellant, VERSUS WAYNE SCOTT, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas (4:93 CV 392 Y) _ March 20, 1995 Before SMITH, EMILIO M. GARZA, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. JERRY E. SMITH, Circuit Judge:* The petition for rehearing is GRANTED. The co
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 94-10302 Summary Calendar _ JOHNNY LOGAN HICKS, Petitioner-Appellant, VERSUS WAYNE SCOTT, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas (4:93 CV 392 Y) _ March 20, 1995 Before SMITH, EMILIO M. GARZA, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. JERRY E. SMITH, Circuit Judge:* The petition for rehearing is GRANTED. The cou..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
_______________
No. 94-10302
Summary Calendar
_______________
JOHNNY LOGAN HICKS,
Petitioner-Appellant,
VERSUS
WAYNE SCOTT,
Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice,
Institutional Division,
Defendant-Appellant.
_________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
(4:93 CV 392 Y)
_________________________
March 20, 1995
Before SMITH, EMILIO M. GARZA, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
JERRY E. SMITH, Circuit Judge:*
The petition for rehearing is GRANTED. The court withdraws
its prior opinion issued on October 13, 1994, and substitutes the
following:
*
Local Rule 47.5.1 provides: "The publication of opinions that have no
precedential value and merely decide particular cases on the basis of well-
settled principles of law imposes needless expense on the public and burdens on
the legal profession." Pursuant to that rule, the court has determined that this
opinion should not be published.
Johnny Hicks appeals the denial of his petition for writ of
habeas corpus for procedural default in the state courts. Because
the state concedes that the Texas abuse-of-the-writ doctrine is not
followed regularly by the state courts, see Lowe v. Scott,
No. 93-1276 (5th Cir. Mar. 20, 1995), issued contemporaneously
herewith, we affirm on the merits and not because of procedural
default.
Hicks has not demonstrated a substantive basis for a Batson
claim. Five black veniremen were excluded at trial. Hicks did not
object to the exclusion of four of them, challenging only that of
the fifth, Williams.
A claim under Batson cannot be asserted on appeal where the
defendant did not object at trial, as Hicks did not with regard to
the first four. See, e.g., Wilkerson v. Collins,
950 F.2d 1054,
1063 (5th Cir.), cert. denied,
113 S. Ct. 3035 (1992). The fifth,
Williams, was successfully challenged for cause by the prosecution
because of absenteeism.
Williams was nowhere to be found when the jury was called into
the courtroom to be sworn. Nor was he present at 9:00 a.m. the
next day. At 9:25 a.m., the judge proceeded without Williams. At
about 11:00 a.m., Williams appeared in court pursuant to an
attachment that had been issued the day before, when he was first
discovered missing. The state objected to Williams on the basis
that he had missed the court's instructions and the state's initial
voir dire, and the objection was sustained by the court. Batson is
inapplicable to an exclusion for cause in a case such as this,
2
where a venireman's erratic behavior and absences have inconve-
nienced the court and where the reasons for the exclusion appear on
the face of the record.
AFFIRMED.
3