Alameda County District Attorney Pamela Price is facing a pivotal decision: whether to retry a 1991 murder case that was recently overturned due to racially biased jury selection. This case is part of a more extensive review by her office, which is scrutinizing dozens of death penalty convictions for potential misconduct dating back decades.
The case in question involves Curtis Lee Ervin, now 71, who was convicted of murder and sentenced to death in 1991 for the killing of Carlene McDonald. Ervin’s conviction was vacated earlier this month after the California Attorney General’s office found that a prosecutor from the Alameda County District Attorney’s Office had systematically excluded Black jurors from the trial.
The prosecutor in question used peremptory strikes to remove nine of eleven Black potential jurors, as well as one Jewish individual, from the jury pool. This practice, which was ruled unconstitutional, raises serious concerns about racial and religious discrimination in the jury selection process.
“The prosecutor’s actions in this case were very problematic,” said DA Pamela Price, a former civil rights attorney elected in 2022 on a platform of progressive reforms. “The exclusion of jurors based on race or religion is not only unconstitutional but also fundamentally undermines the integrity of our judicial system.”
The review by the Attorney General’s office, which compared the responses of Black jurors to those of white jurors, found clear evidence of racial bias. The prosecutor struck 82% of Black jurors, compared to just 20% of non-Black jurors. This disparity led to the conclusion that the jury selection process was tainted, prompting the federal judge to vacate Ervin’s conviction on August 1. Price has until the end of September to decide whether to retry the case, dismiss the charges, or seek a settlement.
Ervin, who has always maintained his innocence, is no longer on death row but is being held in a state prison for inmates with medical needs. His attorney, Pamala Sayasane, expressed relief at the judge’s decision but urged the DA to avoid a retrial. “Retrying Curtis Ervin would be a grave injustice,” Sayasane stated. “His prosecution was tainted by misconduct from the start, and he deserves to finally have peace after 38 years of this nightmare.”
The scrutiny of Ervin’s case is part of a broader investigation into death penalty cases handled by the Alameda County District Attorney’s Office over the past several decades. This review was prompted by a federal judge’s finding that there was substantial evidence of systemic racial and religious bias in jury selection in these cases. Specifically, the review focuses on the exclusion of Black and Jewish jurors, a practice that appears to have been commonplace in the 1980s and 1990s.
The catalyst for this investigation was the discovery of handwritten notes in a separate case—the 1995 conviction of Ernest Dykes—showing that prosecutors had deliberately excluded Black and Jewish female jurors. These notes, uncovered by a prosecutor in Price’s office, suggested a broader pattern of misconduct that may date back to 1977.
Considering these findings, Price’s office has already addressed the potential injustices. In Dykes’ case, prosecutors settled with the defense, and they are now seeking to have him released on parole next year. Additionally, two other death row inmates have been included in the review, with Price’s office pursuing resentencing options.
As the review continues, the potential for uncovering further instances of misconduct looms large. “This is a critical moment for our justice system,” Price remarked. “We must ensure that every individual, regardless of race or religion, receives a fair trial.”
The outcome of these cases could have far-reaching implications for California’s legal system, particularly in how it addresses past injustices in the application of the death penalty. For Curtis Lee Ervin and others like him, the hope is that this review will bring long-overdue justice.
