Wynn

MEMORANDUM ***

Wynn appeals the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. He argues that the state violated the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution when the prosecutor struck the single female African-American from the venire. He contends that the prosecutor’s use of a peremptory challenge against this venire member was discriminatory on account of race, see Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 , 106 S.Ct. 1712 , 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986) (prohibiting racial discrimination during jury selection) and gender, see J.E.B. v. Alabama, 511 U.S. 127 , 114 S.Ct. 1419 , 128 L.Ed.2d 89 (1994) (prohibiting gender discrimination during jury selection). Because Wynn’s arguments lack merit, we AFFIRM the district court’s decision denying the petition.

A. The Gender Claim

Wynn’s gender claim is procedurally barred and without merit. Wynn argues that the prosecutor evidenced gender discrimination in stating “as far as people who are overweight, women who are overweight, I feel that people who do not take care of themselves causes me concern as far as being able to sit on a jury.” Wynn, however, did not raise a gender discrimination claim at trial, only a…