Wooten
Wooten v. Castro
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM *
California state prisoner Roosevelt Wooten appeals the district court’s denial of his habeas corpus petition brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 , as limited by 28 U.S.C. § 2254 , challenging his jury trial convictions of attempted murder, assault, and burglary. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 and, after de novo review, we affirm.
Wooten contends that the prosecutor exercised a peremptory challenge to remove one African-American potential juror, Robert Smith, in a racially discriminatory manner in violation of the Equal Protection Clause. See Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 , 106 S.Ct. 1712 , 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986). 1 ‘Where a defendant asserts that a prosecutor’s peremptory challenges were racially-motivated, a court must apply a three-step process for evaluating a Batson claim.” Collins v. Rice, 365 F.3d 667, 677 (9th Cir.), petition for cert. filed, 73 U.S.L.W. 3076 (July 7, 2004) (No. 04-52). The first step, the defendant’s prima facie showing that the prosecutor exercised a peremptory challenge because of race, is not at issue in this appeal. See Hernandez v. New York, 500 U.S. 352, 359 , 111 S.Ct. 1859 , 114 L.Ed.2d 395 (1991).