Opinion ID: 2598865
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: Venireperson Brantley

Text: Venireperson Brantley, an artist and publisher, said that a close friend of his had been murdered. Brantley said that he had made time for the jury service and that he had two daughters to take care of, although he said that they would be fine. When asked by the defendant's attorney whether any of the potential jurors had known someone to carry a gun for protection, Brantley responded, Yes. They hear that someone is after them or they feel there is a reason for them to carry a gun. In giving a race-neutral reason for striking Brantley, the prosecutor referred to Brantley's sympathy for a person who would be forced to carry a gun for protection. The prosecutor also cited the facts that Brantley was responsible for the care of his children and responsible for his business. On appeal, the defendant disputes that Brantley knew someone who carried a gun. The defendant also points out that Brantley assured the court that his daughters and business would be fine. The State gave a facially racial-neutral reason for striking Brantley. Whether Brantley personally knew someone who carried a gun or not, something triggered him to respond to the question and, regardless of what that something was, it indicated sympathy for the need to carry a gun for self-protection. This sympathy, in turn, translated into sympathy for the defendant's theory at trial.