Jordan
United States v. Jordan
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Edric Charles Jordan and Timothy Patrick appeal their jury trial convictions for *674 conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine and for possession with intent to distribute cocaine. Jordan also appeals his conviction on two additional counts — possession with intent to distribute cocaine and possession with intent to distribute cocaine base. We now affirm. Because the parties are familiar with the facts and procedural history of this case, we need not recount them here.
I. Batson Claim
Defendants objected to the prosecution’s peremptory strike of one of three prospective black jurors based on her race.
We agree that the prosecutor’s explanation was race neutral. 1 See Purkett v. Elem, 514 U.S. 765, 768 , 115 S.Ct. 1769 , 131 L.Ed.2d 834 (1995) (noting that the explanation need not even be “persuasive, or even plausible”). Furthermore, the district court did not commit clear error when it found that there was no purposeful discrimination after noting that the prosecutor had not struck two other prospective black jurors in the venire. See United States v. Chinchilla, 874 F.2d 695 , 698 n. 4 (9th Cir.1989).