People v. Johnson CA2/1

BACKGROUND ON SECTION 231.

Prior to the enactment of section 231.7, “trial courts examined peremptory challenges under the three-step inquiry established by Batson v. Kentucky (1986) 476 U.S. 79 [106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69] and People v. Wheeler (1978) 22 Cal.3d 258 . . . .” (People v. Jaime (2023) 91 Cal.App.5th 941, 943.) The Legislature designed section 231.7 to address “the limitations of the Batson/Wheeler inquiry.” (People v. Jaime, supra, at p. 943.) The author of Assembly Bill No. 3070, which enacted section 231.7, stated that the Batson/Wheeler approach “has failed” because it polices only “acts of intentional discrimination.” The bill’s author wrote, “Courts have acknowledged that it can be difficult and often impossible for the trial judge to determine whether the lawyer making the challenge actually intended to discriminate. . . . Perhaps more important, the existing procedure cannot address strikes exercised because of implicit bias, that is, unconscious or automatic attitudes and stereotypes.” (Assem. Com. on Judiciary, Rep. on Assem. Bill No. 3070 (2019- 2020 Reg. Sess.) as amended May 4, 2020, p. 6.) The bill’s sponsors noted that several studies and…