Shakir

DISCUSSION

I. Batson/Wheeler Motion

Shakir argues that the trial court failed to conduct a “‘sincere and reasoned’” evaluation of Billingsley’s justifications for excusing a prospective juror. A. Relevant factual background 1. Initial panel of prospective jurors Voir dire began with 18 prospective jurors called up. During the initial questioning, the trial court excused several prospective jurors for hardship and called up replacements. When the time came for the first round of for-cause and peremptory challenges, four of the 18 seated prospective jurors were Latino. The other persons represented a diverse population.2 2. First round of for-cause and peremptory challenges During the first round of juror challenges, the trial court sua sponte excluded one prospective juror because he insisted that he was biased. Shakir’s counsel, Gabriel Herrera Avina, asserted his first for-cause challenge against a Latina prospective juror, who said that she sat on another jury in a car accident trial and found that it was a “waste of time.” The trial court denied this challenge because the prospective juror had acknowledged that this was a different case and that she did not know the facts in…