Opinion ID: 2968018
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Ms. Jinwright

Text: In response to Kandies’s Batson challenge, the State asserted that it peremptorily struck Ms. Jinwright because she has worked with three- or four-year-old children and was hesitant on the death penalty. J.A. 131. As previously noted, once the State put forth these race neutral reasons, Kandies had the burden of establishing that they were pretextual. Kandies, however, failed to argue that the State’s proffered reasons were pretextual. Indeed, he did not even respond to the State’s proffered reasons when afforded the opportunity. Consequently, I review this Batson challenge for plain error, which I do not find. Davis, 160 F.3d at 1027. The race neutral reasons proffered by the State were clear, sufficiently specific and related to the case, which is all that Batson requires in the second part of its three-part test. 476 U.S. at 97-98.