Sifuentes

ORDER

The opinion filed on February 18, 2016, and published at 815 F.3d 490 , is hereby amended as follows:

On page 511, in the first full paragraph, remove the following sentence: 126 S.Ct. 969 . >.

With these amendments, the petition for rehearing en banc is DENIED. Judge O’Scannlain and Judge Ikuta voted to deny the petition for rehearing en banc and Judge Teilborg so recommended. The petition for rehearing en banc was circulated to the judges of the court, and no judge requested a vote for en banc consideration.

The petition for rehearing en banc is DENIED. No further petitions for rehearing or rehearing en banc will be entertained.

OPINION

This appeal raises the question whether the California Court of Appeal made an *513 unreasonable determination of the facts in affirming the trial court’s application of Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 , 106 S.Ct. 1712 , 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986). On trial for first degree murder of a police officer, Miguel…