Supreme Court of Connecticut
State v. Edwards
November 11, 2014
Summary
The concurrence agrees that the defendant's conviction should be affirmed because he failed to establish that the peremptory strike of C.D. violated the constitutional prohibition against racial discrimination or warranted supervisory relief. It disagrees with the majority's conclusion that the court could not consider a supplemental National Geographic article concerning racial self-identification under Practice Book § 67-10. Justice Palmer would have considered the article because the prosecutor's justification and the trial court's assessment were based on subjective and anecdotal observations.