Alcorn

MEMORANDUM **

Julius Alcorn appeals his conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 922 (g) for possessing a firearm after being convicted of a felony. We affirm.

Alcorn’s rights under the Fifth Amendment were not violated at voir dire when the government exercised a peremptory strike against an African-American juror. See Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 , 106 S.Ct. 1712 , 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986). Alcorn correctly argues that the district court erred in stating that a defendant must demonstrate a pattern or practice of discrimination to prevail on a Batson claim. See Hernandez v. New York, 500 U.S. 352 , 111 S.Ct. 1859 , 114 L.Ed.2d 395 (1991). The error, however, was harmless. Alcorn has not demonstrated that the prosecutor’s proffered race-neutral basis for the strike — that the juror had previously served on only one jury, which hung — was pretextual. See id. at 359 .

The district court did not err in excluding as hearsay a mobile data terminal communication from an unknown source with the arresting officers’ patrol car on the night of the arrest. At trial, Alcorn argued that the evidence came within three different hearsay exceptions that the court properly rejected. On appeal, he offers a…