Sen. Bob Graham: “Justice Barkett, in her dissent suggested, first, the fact that there was a different standard under State equal…”

“Justice Barkett, in her dissent suggested, first, the fact that there was a different standard under State equal protection than under the Federal equal protection. She makes, frankly, a point which I as a Floridian am very proud--that the Florida Supreme Court was dealing with the question of racially discriminatory selection of juries prior to the time that the U.S. Supreme Court recognized that as an impediment under Federal equal protection standards. She cites that as an example of the fact that State constitutional standards are not necessarily intended to just mimic Federal standards. She proceeds on to therefore reason that it is appropriate for the State to have a process by which claims of denial of equal protection under the State constitution can be appropriately determined. She suggests the following standard: A party asserting racial discrimination in the State's decision to seek the death penalty should make a timely objection and demonstrate on the record that the discrimination exists and that there is a strong likelihood that influences the State to seek the death penalty. Such discrimination conceivably could be based on the race of the victim or the race of the defendant. Once the trial court determines that the initial burden has been met by the defendant, the burden then shifts to the State to show that the practices in question are not racially motivated.”