FREE ELECTRONIC LIBRARY - Online materials, documents

Pages:     | 1 ||

«MARIO ALEMAN, No. 09-55837 Petitioner-Appellant, D.C. No. v. 2:06-cv-04687JSL-RZ DOMINGO URIBE, JR., Warden, Appellee-Respondent. RAYMOND MALDONADO, ...»

-- [ Page 2 ] --

(citing Rice v. Collins, 546 U.S. 333, 340 (2006)). This is a fact-based inquiry. To determine if a prosecutor’s mistake undermines his or her credibility, we must consider whether, based on the facts of the case, the mistake indicates purposeful discrimination instead of innocent error. See Mitleider v. Hall, 391 F.3d 1039, 1049 (9th Cir. 2004) (Batson is not violated by prosecutor’s honest, but mistaken belief as long as it is not pretextual). After all, Batson prohibits purposeful discrimination, not honest, unintentional mistakes. See Batson, 476 U.S. at 98.

It was not objectively unreasonable for the California Court of Appeal to affirm the trial court’s Batson ruling on the ground that an honest mistake is not evidence of racial bias. For a prosecutor to eliminate a prospective juror by peremptory strike based on an honest mistake as to what that juror had said in voir dire is not the same, for constitutional purposes, as striking the juror based on an intentionally discriminatory motive. The record supports the trial court’s finding that the prosecutor’s mistake was credible, honest, and unintentional. During voir dire, the prosecutor stated several times that he was feeling under the weather. In fact, when the prosecutor initially explained his reasons for excusing Juror Acevedo, he stated, “I am sorry. I am having a hard time articulating my thoughts because I am not feeling well.” The record also shows that Juror Acevedo was sitting near the juror who made the “prissy” comment, and, when asked the same question about police work, Juror Acevedo said that she would not be able to deal with the pressure of police work. Given the prosecutor’s illness, the jurors’ proximity to each other, and the relative similarity of their ALEMAN V. URIBE 11 comments, it is a permissible finding of the trial court to say that the prosecutor innocently transposed the responses from the jurors. Such “innocent transposition makes little headway toward the conclusion that the prosecutor’s explanation was not clearly credible.” Rice, 546 U.S. at 340.

We must give “double deference” to the trial court’s credibility finding where that finding was affirmed by the state court of appeals. Jamerson, 713 F.3d at 1234. One level of deference arises from the broad power of a trial court to assess credibility of the prosecutor’s statements that were made in open court. Another level of deference arises from the AEDPA context where we defer to state court decisions that are not objectively unreasonable. See Briggs v. Grounds, 682 F.3d 1165, 1170 (9th Cir. 2012) (“Here our standard is doubly deferential: unless the state appellate court was objectively unreasonable in concluding that a trial court’s credibility determination was supported by substantial evidence, we must uphold it.”). Applying this double deference, we cannot say that the Court of Appeal’s decision, which relied on the trial court’s credibility finding, was objectively unreasonable.

There is ample support in the record for the trial court’s determination that the prosecutor did not act with purposeful discrimination when he removed Juror Acevedo based on his mistaken belief that she had said that she was too “prissy” for police work. In the initial Batson proceeding, the prosecutor explained that he removed Juror Acevedo because her “prissy” comment caused him to believe that she was sensitive and would have a difficult time dealing with the firearms and violence in the case. Although, as the trial court noted, this was not the strongest explanation, in the context of this case it is sufficient to show the absence of discriminatory 12 ALEMAN V. URIBE intent. See Mitleider, 391 F.3d at 1050 (“The prosecutor’s motives, however, must be considered on the basis of the facts set forth in each particular case.”).

Other factors reinforce that conclusion: First, the prosecutor’s explanation was related to the case, which involved very violent facts, and it would be reasonable to conclude that a sensitive juror might have a tough time dealing with that violence. See id. at 1049 (recognizing that immaturity and lack of life experience are legitimate bases for peremptory challenges). Second, as the trial court noted, the prosecution accepted the panel several times with Hispanic members. See Burks v. Borg, 27 F.3d 1424, 1429 (9th Cir.

1994) (considering the prosecutor’s acceptance of minorities on the jury a valid, but not necessarily dispositive, factor).

Third, the trial court conducted a thorough review of the record and twice assessed the prosecutor’s credibility, first during its initial Batson review and then when it reopened the Batson motion. This was not a “rubber stamp” decision by the state trial court. Fourth, comparative analysis does not show that the trial court’s determination was objectively unreasonable. Appellants argue that the prosecutor did not challenge other jurors who had less life experience than Juror Acevedo. Although these other jurors bear some similarity to Juror Acevedo, the record does not show that they were so similar as to compel the conclusion that the state court erred in concluding that the prosecutor did not purposefully discriminate. See Burks, 27 F.3d at 1429–30 (sustaining the state court’s decision where the objective evidence of discrimination was relatively weak). In short, there was ample support for the California trial court’s decision that the prosecutor made an honest mistake and did not intentionally discriminate in jury selection. On this premise, the California Court of Appeal decided that the important principle of ALEMAN V. URIBE 13 Batson was not violated. We conclude that this was not an objectively unreasonable application of Batson. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s denial of habeas corpus relief.

Pages:     | 1 ||

Similar works:

«FRI DAY, DECEM BER 0 9, 2 0 1 1, 6 : 4 5 AM OzEquities Tel. 613 9748 5033 Locked Bag No 30. OZEQUITIES NEWSLETTER OZEQUITIES NEWSLETTER 9748 5463 Fax 613 Werribee 3030 ozequities@mail.smartchat.net.au subsidiary of News Bites Pty Limited Australia’s most comprehensive daily digest of equity news Tel 613 9748 5033 Fax 613 9748 5463 ozequities@pacific.net.au FEATURE Week's Special DDT: WORLD LEADER WITH PATENTED IDENTIFICATION AND AUTHENTICATION PRODUCTS FOR VARIOUS APPLICATIONS WITH GLOBAL...»

«Esbjerg kutterflåde 1870-2016 Opdateret 25052016 Esbjerg skibsregister nr. 1: ”Leve” af Hjerting Aaben baad 4.91 tons Maalebrev Hjerting 30. August 1869 tilhørende L. Nielsen, Hjerting. Skøde dateret Hjerting den 17. Marts 1871. Solgt den 17. Oktober 1887 til udlandet. Esbjerg Skibsregister nr. 1: ”Adonis” af Hjerting Aaben baad 2,1 tons Maalerbrev Hjerting 19. august 1869. Bygget hvor vides ikke, købt på strandingsauktion, adkomst bevis haves ikke. Nr. 1 ”Adonis” Niels Chr....»

«Symmetric Somewhat Homomorphic Encryption over the Integers Bogdan Kulynych Abstract We describe a symmetric variant of homomomorphic encryption scheme by van Dijk et al. [DGHV10], semantically secure under the error-free approximate-GCD problem. We also provide the implementation of the scheme as a C/C++ library. The scheme allows to perform “mixed” homomorphic operations on ciphertexts and plaintexts, eliminating the need to encrypt new ciphertexts using the public key for some...»

«Project Acronym: ACAT Project Type: STREP Project Title: Learning and Execution of Action Categories Contract Number: 600578 Starting Date: 01-03-2013 Ending Date: 30-04-2016 Deliverable Number: D5.5 Deliverable Title: Software and hardware architecture and integration  Update of D5.3 Type (Internal, Restricted, Public): PU Authors : L. Bodenhagen, D. Chrysostomou, G. Lisca, H. Langer, M. Tamosionaite Contributing Partners: SDU, AAU, UoB, UGOE Contractual Date of Delivery to the EC: 31-08-2015...»

«Finance Item x: NSW State Budget 2011-12 NSW Budget Papers 2011-12 The budget 2011/12 continues on www.budget.nsw.gov.au the path of major infrastructure Contact spending. Existing programs Sascha Moege affecting Local Government have 02 9242 4045 sascha.moege@lgsa.org.au largely been maintained. or The following information focuses on budget Shaun.McBride measures affecting Local Government. Local Government Focus Overview shaun.mcbride@lgsa.org.au Funding for programs directly affecting Local...»

«Beyond The Graft: Synthetic Scaffolds For Soft-Tissue Reconstruction By Marc Wortman (Contributor) / Email the Author Feature Articles / Word Count: 3916 / Article # 2014900077 / Posted: April 15 2014 8:00 AM Executive Summary A field littered with failures sees few companies brave enough to try again. A big market awaits medtech start-ups that find a successful way to end the need for autografts and allografts for softtissue repair. A field littered with failures sees few companies brave...»

<<  HOME   |    CONTACTS
2017 www.thesis.dislib.info - Online materials, documents

Materials of this site are available for review, all rights belong to their respective owners.
If you do not agree with the fact that your material is placed on this site, please, email us, we will within 1-2 business days delete him.