People v. Pereida CA3

DISCUSSION

Defendant, who is Hispanic, contends the prosecutor violated his state and federal constitutional rights to equal protection and a jury drawn from a fair cross-section of the community by peremptorily excusing three African-American prospective jurors. (See Batson, supra, 476 U.S. 79; Wheeler, supra, 22 Cal.3d 258) He argues the trial court erred in concluding he failed to make a prima facie case under Batson/Wheeler because the prospective jurors at issue appeared to be only partially Black. A The prosecutor used three of his peremptory challenges to excuse potential jurors D.J.,4 D.L., and P.B. D.J. was a warehouse worker from West Sacramento. He served on a jury in the Bay Area a long time ago. In response to certain questions on the initial jury questionnaire, D.J. said he had private comments for the court. Outside the presence of

3 People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996) 13 Cal.4th 497.

4 Another member of the jury venire, P.J., shared the same last name. His excusal is not challenged on appeal.

3 the other prospective jurors, D.J. explained that his son had been arrested and was roughed up by the police. He therefore had a negative opinion of law…