Dario Cannon v. Gerald Janda

AMENDED MEMORANDUM

Petitioner Dario L. Cannon appeals the denial of his habeas petition, alleging that the Alameda County Superior Court failed to properly conduct the inquiry required by Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 , 106 S.Ct. 1712 , 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986), after the prosecution exercised peremptory strikes against all seven minority veniremembers. On appeal, Cannon pursues only the Bat-son claim with respect to three potential jurors. Cannon further alleges that the trial court erred when finding that the reasons offered by the prosecution for the strikes were race-neutral. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

1.The California Court of Appeal reasonably ruled that the trial court applied the proper legal standards established by the United States Supreme Court. The trial court’s references to California cases did not taint the analysis, as our review of the record reveals that the trial court did not ignore Batson’s third step. See Johnson v. California, 645 U.S. 162 , 165, 171— 72, 125 S.Ct. 2410 , 162 L.Ed.2d 129 (2005). Further, the trial court expressly found that the prosecutor was “truthful” in describing her race-neutral reasons for the…