Bush

MEMORANDUM *

William J. Bush appeals the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Although AEDPA ordinarily requires deference to state court decisions, we review Bush’s Batson claim de novo because the California Court of Appeal applied the more stringent standard of People v. Wheeler, 22 Cal.3d 258, 280 , 148 Cal.Rptr. 890 , 583 P.2d 748 (1978), rather than the “reasonable inference” test of Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 96 , 106 S.Ct. 1712 , 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986). See Williams v. Runnels, 432 F.3d 1102, 1105 (9th Cir.2006).

To support a Batson challenge, the defendant must establish “a prima facie case ‘by showing that the totality of the relevant facts gives rise to an inference of discriminatory purpose.’ ” Johnson v. California, 545 U.S. 162, 168 , 125 S.Ct. 2410 , 162 L.Ed.2d 129 (2005) (quoting Batson, 476 U.S. at 93-94 , 106 S.Ct. 1712 ). “[A] wide variety of evidence” may support an inference of discrimination, and the court considers all relevant facts and circumstances. Id. at 169 , 125 S.Ct. 2410 . The fact that the excused juror “ ‘was the one Black member of the venire does not, in itself, raise an inference of…