Opinion ID: 2599880
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Defense Motions

Text: There were four Batson-Wheeler motions. The first expressly covered three Black males against whom the prosecutor had exercised peremptory challenges: L.W., L.T., and C.W. (See People v. Avila (2006) 38 Cal.4th 491, 549, 552, 43 Cal. Rptr.3d 1, 133 P.3d 1076 [scope of motion affects scope of inquiry into reasons for excusal].) The trial court stated that it saw nothing amounting to a prima facie case of improper group bias, but directed the prosecutor to explain her reasons for the challenges. After hearing these explanations, the court denied the motion without elaboration. In their second Batson-Wheeler motion, defendants expressly challenged the excusals of L.B. and K.B. The trial court found a prima facie case of improper group bias, but denied relief after hearing the prosecutor's reasons. It accepted without elaboration the prosecutor's reasons regarding L.B. With regard to K.B., the court commented that he showed an anti-capital punishment bias throughout the process. In their third Batson-Wheeler motion, defendants expressly challenged the excusal of V.H. The trial court first granted the motion, but changed its mind and denied it the next day. The court did so following an extensive hearing in which the prosecutor insisted that she had no reason or desire to discriminate, and argued that [no] prosecutor would allow a man like [V.H.] to sit on this jury. The court observed that all 6 of the People's peremptories have been of male Blacks. The court nonetheless concluded, I don't see anything that appears to be inherently racial in the prosecutor's reasons for excusing prospective jurors, and that the prosecutor had excused V.H. for a race neutral reason. In their fourth Batson-Wheeler motion, defendants expressly challenged the excusal of N.S. The trial court denied this motion too, with little discussion, stating, I accept the prosecution's explanation and reason as valid. The parties agreed that several Blacks served on the jury. The prosecutor also asserted, in response to the Batson-Wheeler motion concerning V.H., that the defense had peremptorily challenged three Black prospective jurors and sought stipulations to the excusal of another three. The foreperson of the jury at the guilt phase was a Black man, and the foreperson of the jury at the penalty phase was a Black woman.