Opinion ID: 2598865
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: Venireperson Anderson

Text: Venireperson Anderson volunteered that she was a cousin of Greg Hill. The prosecutor asked Anderson the age of her cousin, and she estimated him to be about 18 years old. When told that the Hill involved in the case was about 28 years old, Anderson said that the two Hills could not be the same person. The prosecutor then corrected herself and said that the Hill involved in the case was 25 years old; Anderson's response was equivocal: [Prosecutor]: I actually misspoke. Let me go look because I didn't look when I said 28. I was thinking about another case. Let me look real quick. . . . . [Prosecutor]: I checked. He would be 25 now. Venireperson Anderson: I really don't know. The Court: Okay. You and he are obviously not close and you don't see a lot of him? Venireperson Anderson: No. At this point, the court asked Anderson if it would affect her ability to decide the case if the relevant Hill turned out to be her cousin. Anderson said that it would not affect her. In giving a race-neutral reason for the strike, the prosecutor cited the potential relationship between Anderson and the Hill involved in the case. The prosecutor admitted that there was some uncertainty, but she did not want to take the chance. This uncertainty establishes a facially valid race-neutral reason for striking Anderson, and the defendant's Batson challenge fails as to Anderson.