Thomas v. Lumpkin

(1) Whether, under the Supreme Court"s clearly established precedent, Andre Thomas"an African American man who, during a schizophrenic episode, killed his estranged white wife, their son, and her daughter" was denied his constitutional right to be tried by an impartial jury, when three jurors at Thomas"s capital trial expressed opposition to people of different races marrying and having children"writing on their voir dire questionnaires that such relationships are "against God"s will," that we should "stay with our Blood Line," and that the children of interracial relationships are denied "a specific race to belong to""and when the jurors never disclaimed those views or said they could set them aside to consider Thomas"s mental illness and make the individualized sentencing judgment required by the Constitution; and (2) whether Thomas was denied his constitutional right to the effective assistance of counsel, when defense counsel did not object to, or seek to strike, any of those three jurors, and failed to ask two of them a single question about their bias.