DUANE EDWARD BUCK, PETITIONER v. LORIE DAVIS, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE
Supreme Court of the United States, Roberts, Feb. 22, 2017,
Ineffective Assistance of Counsel- Deficient and prejudicial where Defense presented an “expert” at sentencing who testified that the defendant was more likely to be violent because he was black.

(Dissent- Thomas and Alito- COA should not have been granted; also, Strickland prejudice was not shown)

In 1995, Buck shot and killed his ex-girlfriend along with her friend and shot his own step-sister who was over at the ex-girlfriend’s house. At sentencing, the Defense presented an “expert” witness who testified that Buck was more likely to be violent because he was black.

Ineffective Assistance of Counsel- Deficient and prejudicial where Defense presented an “expert” at sentencing who testified that the defendant was more likely to be violent because he was black.
Facts:
In 1995, Buck shot and killed his ex-girlfriend along with her friend and shot his own step-sister who was over at the ex-girlfriend’s house.
At sentencing, the Defense presented an “expert” witness who testified that Buck was more likely to be violent because he was black. The witness had said the same in the report that he wrote and shared prior to testifying.
Holding:
When a jury hears expert testimony that expressly makes a defendant’s race directly pertinent on the question of whether he should be sentenced to death, it can not be dismissed as minimal prejudice.