The US Supreme Court will hear a case on Wednesday that could deem all past non-unanimous jury convictions in Louisiana unconstitutional, potentially resulting in thousands of retrials.
The case was brought on behalf of Thedrick Edwards, a Louisiana man who is serving time on non-unanimous convictions. His lawyer Andre Belanger said his client must be given a retrial.
“Unanimity has always been American law. It was required for Louisiana to enter the country after the Louisiana Purchase and it was required for Louisiana to rejoin The Union after the Civil War,” said Belanger.
The case would decide whether or not Ramos vs. Louisiana, a ruling that deemed non-unanimous convictions unconstitutional, would be retroactive to settled cases. A constitutional amendment deeming all future non-unanimous convictions unconstitutional was passed by Louisiana voters in 2018 but was not retroactive to cases that had already been decided.
Belanger said all past non-unanimous convictions deserve a second look.
“When you look at the data on actual exonerations that have been proven in Louisiana, a quarter of those exonerations came out of non-unanimous juries,” said Belanger.
Edwards is serving a life sentence on rape, kidnapping, and armed robbery convictions related to a 2006 Baton Rouge crime spree. Edwards’ primary charge, rape, was decided 11-1 with the court’s lone Black juror voting to acquit.
The Louisiana Attorney General opposes the case on the grounds it could upend thousands of violent crime convictions like Edwards’, but Belanger said it’s about righting a historic wrong.
“The moment the Federal troops left after Reconstruction Louisiana tried to do an end around the 14th Amendment and design a statutory scheme for the sole purpose of disempowering African Americans and imprisoning them,” said Belanger.
Louisiana Solicitor General Liz Murrill will represent the state by phone. She released a statement saying “If Ramos were to be applied retroactively thousands of long-final convictions, whose crimes each have victims, would be unsettled.”
