Opinion ID: 784798
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Holloway's Batson challenge and the prosecutor's explanations

Text: 40 Holloway first objected to the prosecutor's peremptory strikes on the second day of the voir dire proceedings, after the prosecutor struck Brenda Forrest, an African-American female. Holloway's counsel noted, I believe the District Attorney has now used all his challenges on black jurors. I believe he has developed a pattern of striking them. App. Vol VII at 1355. The trial court deferred a discussion of the issue because another prospective juror was entering the courtroom, and jury selection continued. After several additional potential jurors were struck by agreement or for cause, Holloway's counsel formally asserted his objection, stating, I think the District Attorney has now developed a pattern of striking only black prospective jurors. I think that pattern has now developed, and there are nine jurors selected, and two black jurors out of that particular nine. And I would ask for a mistrial and [to] start all over again. App. Vol. VII at 1367-68. 41 Without indicating whether it thought Holloway established a prima facie case, the trial court invited a response from the prosecutor, asking, Does the Commonwealth have anything to say at this time? Id. at 1368. The prosecutor replied, Sure, Judge. As [defense counsel] has indicated, number one, we have nine seated in the box, two of them [sic] whom are black. One black male and one black female. [Counsel] is incorrect when he tells the Court that I have used my pre-empts exclusively on blacks, that's not true. I've struck a white woman also. Id. The trial judge then observed that Holloway too had used a peremptory strike against a black female the previous day. 8 After a brief discussion with Holloway as to the reasons why he excluded that potential black juror, id. at 1368-69, the trial court ended the matter without expressly ruling on whether the prosecutor had struck African-Americans because of their race. The judge concluded, [Holloway] also knocked off a potential black juror, but the record will speak for itself. Id. at 1369. At that point in the proceedings, the record was clear that the prosecutor had used seven of eight peremptory strikes against African-Americans. 42 The prosecutor subsequently exercised four additional peremptory strikes, all against African-Americans. After the first of those strikes, against Starlett Sandoval, Holloway's counsel noted for the record that the Commonwealth has struck another black juror. Id. at 1376. The prosecutor offered no explanation for the strike, nor did the court request one. The prosecutor later struck Robert Keel, after which defense counsel noted, Let the record indicate a black male. Id. at 1397. Without prompting from the trial court, the prosecutor elected to explain the strike, stating, May the record indicate a single, young, unemployed, on welfare, black male. Id. The prosecutor next used a peremptory strike against John Hackley, Sr., and Holloway again noted the venireperson's race. App. Vol. VIII at 1488. The prosecutor explained, Let the record further show that it is a black juror, black male juror approximately the same age as the defendant. Id. Finally, the prosecutor exercised a peremptory strike against Elouise Baldi, and after Holloway made note of her race, the prosecutor explained that she was a Black female, whose brother-in-law was convicted of narcotics charges. Narcotics would play a central role in the testimony of this case. Id. at 1493-94. 43 The matter proceeded to trial with a jury of nine white jurors and three black jurors, with two white alternate jurors. 9 Holloway renewed his Batson challenge, albeit in a cursory fashion, in a post-verdict motion for a new trial. 10 The trial court summarily rejected the post-trial Batson argument as unspecific.