hernandez
new
york
argued
february
decided
may
counsel
petitioner
hernandez
new
york
trial
objected
prosecutor
used
four
peremptory
challenges
exclude
latino
potential
jurors
two
jurors
brothers
convicted
crimes
petitioner
longer
presses
objection
exclusion
individuals
ethnicity
one
two
jurors
uncertain
without
waiting
ruling
whether
hernandez
established
prima
facie
case
discrimination
batson
kentucky
prosecutor
volunteered
struck
two
jurors
bilingual
uncertain
able
listen
follow
interpreter
explained
looked
away
hesitated
responding
inquiry
whether
accept
translator
final
arbiter
witnesses
responses
know
jurors
latinos
motive
exclude
latinos
jury
since
complainants
civilian
witnesses
latinos
rejected
hernandez
claim
decision
affirmed
state
appellate
courts
held
judgment
affirmed
affirmed
justice
kennedy
joined
chief
justice
justice
white
justice
souter
announced
judgment
concluding
prosecutor
use
peremptory
challenges
manner
violating
equal
protection
clause
batson
process
evaluating
objection
peremptory
challenges
defendant
must
make
prima
facie
showing
prosecutor
exercised
peremptory
challenges
basis
race
burden
shifts
prosecutor
articulate
explanation
striking
jurors
question
trial
must
determine
whether
defendant
carried
burden
proving
purposeful
discrimination
pp
since
prosecutor
offered
explanation
peremptory
challenges
trial
ruled
ultimate
question
intentional
discrimination
preliminary
issue
whether
hernandez
made
prima
facie
showing
discrimination
moot
cf
postal
service
bd
govs
aikens
prosecutor
offered
basis
peremptory
strikes
issue
facial
validity
prosecutor
explanation
must
based
something
race
prosecutor
criterion
exclusion
whether
jurors
might
difficulty
accepting
translator
rendition
testimony
might
resulted
disproportionate
removal
prospective
latino
jurors
proof
racially
discriminatory
intent
purpose
required
show
violation
equal
protection
clause
see
arlington
heights
metropolitan
housing
development
need
address
hernandez
argument
ability
bears
close
relation
ethnicity
exercising
peremptory
challenge
former
ground
violates
equal
protection
since
prosecutor
explained
jurors
specific
responses
demeanor
language
proficiency
alone
caused
doubt
ability
defer
official
translation
high
percentage
bilingual
jurors
might
hesitate
answering
questions
like
asked
thus
excluded
prosecutor
criterion
cause
criterion
fail
race
neutrality
test
reason
offered
prosecutor
need
rise
level
challenge
cause
fact
corresponds
valid
challenge
demonstrate
character
pp
trial
commit
clear
error
determining
prosecutor
discriminate
basis
latino
jurors
ethnicity
trial
give
appropriate
weight
disparate
impact
prosecutor
criterion
determining
whether
prosecutor
acted
forbidden
intent
even
though
factor
conclusive
preliminary
race
neutrality
inquiry
chose
believe
prosecutor
explanation
reject
hernandez
assertion
reasons
pretextual
decision
ultimate
question
discriminatory
intent
represents
finding
fact
sort
accorded
great
deference
appeal
regardless
whether
state
decision
whether
relates
constitutional
issue
see
liquor
duffy
deference
makes
particular
sense
context
finding
largely
turn
evaluation
credibility
hernandez
argument
independent
appellate
review
state
trial
denial
batson
claim
rejected
bose
consumers
union
miller
fenton
norris
alabama
distinguished
took
permissible
view
evidence
crediting
prosecutor
explanation
apart
prosecutor
demeanor
relied
facts
defended
use
peremptory
challenges
without
asked
judge
know
jurors
latinos
ethnicity
victims
prosecution
witnesses
tended
undercut
motive
exclude
latinos
jury
moreover
rely
facts
three
challenged
jurors
confidence
identified
latinos
prosecutor
verifiable
legitimate
explanation
two
challenges
pp
decision
imply
exclusion
bilinguals
jury
service
wise
even
constitutional
cases
may
certain
ethnic
groups
communities
proficiency
particular
language
like
skin
color
treated
surrogate
race
equal
protection
analysis
yu
cong
eng
trinidad
policy
striking
speak
given
language
without
regard
trial
particular
circumstances
jurors
individual
responses
may
found
trial
judge
pretext
racial
discrimination
pp
justice
joined
justice
scalia
agreeing
review
clear
error
trial
finding
discriminatory
intent
finding
discriminatory
intent
clearly
erroneous
case
concluded
justice
kennedy
opinion
goes
necessary
assessing
constitutionality
prosecutor
asserted
justification
peremptory
strikes
case
trial
believes
prosecutor
nonracial
justification
finding
clearly
erroneous
end
inquiry
batson
kentucky
require
prosecutor
justify
jury
strike
level
challenge
justification
unrelated
race
batson
requires
prosecutor
reason
striking
juror
juror
race
pp
kenneth
kimerling
argued
cause
petitioner
briefs
ruben
franco
arthur
baer
jay
cohen
argued
cause
respondent
brief
charles
hynes
peter
weinstein
carol
teague
schwartzkopf
victor
barall
richard
larson
antonia
hernandez
juan
cartagena
filed
brief
mexican
american
legal
defense
educational
fund
et
al
amici
curiae
urging
reversal
justice
kennedy
announced
judgment
delivered
opinion
chief
justice
justice
white
justice
souter
join
petitioner
dionisio
hernandez
asks
us
review
new
york
state
courts
rejection
claim
prosecutor
criminal
trial
exercised
peremptory
challenges
exclude
latinos
jury
reason
ethnicity
true
prosecutor
discriminatory
use
peremptory
strikes
violate
equal
protection
clause
interpreted
decision
batson
kentucky
must
determine
whether
prosecutor
offered
basis
challenging
latino
potential
jurors
whether
state
courts
decision
accept
prosecutor
explanation
sustained
petitioner
respondent
use
term
latino
briefs
amicus
brief
employs
instead
term
hispanic
parties
referred
excluded
jurors
term
trial
words
appear
opinions
attempt
made
distinction
parties
make
attempt
distinguish
terms
opinion
refer
excluded
venirepersons
latinos
deference
terminology
preferred
parties
case
comes
us
direct
review
petitioner
convictions
two
counts
attempted
murder
two
counts
criminal
possession
weapon
brooklyn
street
petitioner
fired
several
shots
charlene
calloway
mother
ada
saline
calloway
suffered
three
gunshot
wounds
petitioner
missed
saline
instead
hit
two
men
nearby
restaurant
victims
survived
incident
trial
held
new
york
kings
county
concern
jury
selection
process
proper
application
batson
handed
trial
took
place
potential
jurors
questioned
empaneled
defense
counsel
objected
prosecutor
used
four
peremptory
challenges
exclude
latino
potential
jurors
two
latino
venirepersons
challenged
prosecutor
brothers
convicted
crimes
brother
one
potential
jurors
prosecuted
district
attorney
office
probation
violation
petitioner
press
batson
claim
respect
prospective
jurors
concentrate
two
excluded
individuals
petitioner
raised
batson
objection
prosecutor
wait
ruling
whether
petitioner
established
prima
facie
case
racial
discrimination
instead
prosecutor
volunteered
reasons
striking
jurors
question
explained
honor
reason
rejecting
two
jurors
certain
whether
hispanics
notice
many
hispanics
called
panel
reason
rejecting
two
feel
uncertain
able
listen
follow
interpreter
app
talked
long
time
talked
talked
believe
heart
try
follow
felt
great
deal
uncertainty
whether
accept
interpreter
final
arbiter
said
witnesses
especially
going
witnesses
feel
asked
whether
accept
interpreter
translation
feel
looked
away
said
hesitancy
try
try
follow
interpreter
feel
case
interpreter
main
witnesses
undue
impact
upon
jury
following
recess
defense
counsel
renewed
motion
trial
denied
discussion
objection
continued
however
prosecutor
explained
motive
exclude
latinos
jury
case
involves
four
complainants
complainants
hispanic
witnesses
civilian
witnesses
going
hispanic
absolutely
reason
reason
want
exclude
hispanics
parties
involved
hispanic
certainly
reason
appeal
new
york
appellate
division
noted
though
ethnicity
one
challenged
bilingual
juror
remained
uncertain
prosecutor
challenged
three
prospective
jurors
definite
hispanic
surnames
app
div
ruled
fact
made
prima
facie
showing
discrimination
affirmed
trial
rejection
petitioner
batson
claim
however
ground
prosecutor
offered
explanations
peremptory
strikes
sufficient
rebut
petitioner
prima
facie
case
new
york
appeals
also
affirmed
judgment
holding
prosecutor
offered
legitimate
basis
challenging
individuals
question
deferring
factual
findings
lower
new
york
courts
two
judges
dissented
concluding
record
analyzed
light
standards
adopt
matter
state
constitutional
law
prosecutor
exclusion
bilingual
potential
jurors
permitted
granted
certiorari
affirm
ii
batson
outlined
process
evaluating
claims
prosecutor
used
peremptory
challenges
manner
violating
equal
protection
clause
analysis
set
forth
batson
permits
prompt
rulings
objections
peremptory
challenges
without
substantial
disruption
jury
selection
process
first
defendant
must
make
prima
facie
showing
prosecutor
exercised
peremptory
challenges
basis
race
second
requisite
showing
made
burden
shifts
prosecutor
articulate
explanation
striking
jurors
question
finally
trial
must
determine
whether
defendant
carried
burden
proving
purposeful
discrimination
inquiry
delimits
consideration
arguments
raised
petitioner
prosecutor
defended
use
peremptory
strikes
without
prompting
inquiry
trial
result
trial
occasion
rule
petitioner
made
prima
facie
showing
intentional
discrimination
departure
normal
course
proceeding
need
concern
us
explained
context
employment
discrimination
litigation
title
vii
civil
rights
act
defendant
done
everything
required
plaintiff
properly
made
prima
facie
case
whether
plaintiff
really
longer
relevant
postal
service
bd
govs
aikens
principle
applies
batson
prosecutor
offered
explanation
peremptory
challenges
trial
ruled
ultimate
question
intentional
discrimination
preliminary
issue
whether
defendant
made
prima
facie
showing
becomes
moot
petitioner
contends
reasons
given
prosecutor
challenging
two
bilingual
jurors
race
neutral
evaluating
race
neutrality
attorney
explanation
must
determine
whether
assuming
proffered
reasons
peremptory
challenges
true
challenges
violate
equal
protection
clause
matter
law
addressing
issue
must
keep
mind
fundamental
principle
official
action
held
unconstitutional
solely
results
racially
disproportionate
impact
proof
racially
discriminatory
intent
purpose
required
show
violation
equal
protection
clause
arlington
heights
metropolitan
housing
development
see
also
washington
davis
discriminatory
purpose
implies
intent
volition
intent
awareness
consequences
implies
decisionmaker
selected
particular
course
action
least
part
merely
spite
adverse
effects
upon
identifiable
group
personnel
administrator
mass
feeney
citation
omitted
see
also
mccleskey
kemp
neutral
explanation
context
analysis
means
explanation
based
something
race
juror
step
inquiry
issue
facial
validity
prosecutor
explanation
unless
discriminatory
intent
inherent
prosecutor
explanation
reason
offered
deemed
race
neutral
petitioner
argues
ability
bears
close
relation
ethnicity
consequence
violates
equal
protection
clause
exercise
peremptory
challenge
ground
latino
potential
juror
speaks
spanish
points
high
correlation
ability
ethnicity
new
york
case
tried
need
address
argument
prosecutor
rely
language
ability
without
explained
specific
responses
demeanor
two
individuals
voir
dire
caused
doubt
ability
defer
official
translation
testimony
prosecutor
offered
basis
peremptory
strikes
explained
prosecutor
challenges
rested
neither
intention
exclude
latino
bilingual
jurors
stereotypical
assumptions
latinos
bilinguals
prosecutor
articulated
basis
challenges
divided
potential
jurors
two
classes
whose
conduct
voir
dire
persuade
might
difficulty
accepting
translator
rendition
testimony
potential
jurors
gave
reason
doubt
category
include
latinos
prosecutor
criterion
might
well
result
disproportionate
removal
prospective
latino
jurors
disproportionate
impact
turn
prosecutor
actions
per
se
violation
equal
protection
clause
petitioner
contends
despite
prosecutor
focus
individual
responses
jurors
reason
peremptory
strikes
effect
pure
reason
ny
honest
bilingual
juror
answered
prosecutor
exact
way
brief
petitioner
petitioner
asserts
bilingual
juror
hesitate
answering
questions
like
asked
judge
prosecutor
due
difficulty
ignoring
actual
testimony
view
expected
commitment
prospective
juror
try
follow
interpreter
translation
even
knew
high
percentage
bilingual
jurors
hesitate
answering
questions
like
consequence
excluded
prosecutor
criterion
fact
alone
cause
criterion
fail
test
discussed
disparate
impact
given
appropriate
weight
determining
whether
prosecutor
acted
forbidden
intent
conclusive
preliminary
step
batson
inquiry
argument
relating
impact
classification
alone
show
purpose
see
personnel
administrator
massachusetts
feeney
supra
equal
protection
analysis
turns
intended
consequences
government
classifications
unless
government
actor
adopted
criterion
intent
causing
impact
asserted
impact
violate
principle
race
neutrality
nothing
prosecutor
explanation
shows
chose
exclude
jurors
hesitated
answering
questions
following
interpreter
wanted
prevent
bilingual
latinos
serving
jury
deemed
prosecutor
reason
striking
jurors
racial
classification
face
follow
trial
judge
excuse
cause
juror
whose
hesitation
convinced
judge
juror
inability
accept
official
translation
testimony
explanation
prosecutor
trial
judge
reason
offered
prosecutor
peremptory
strike
need
rise
level
challenge
cause
batson
fact
corresponds
valid
challenge
demonstrate
character
prosecutor
offers
basis
exercise
peremptory
challenges
trial
duty
determine
defendant
established
purposeful
discrimination
disproportionate
impact
latinos
resulting
prosecutor
criterion
excluding
jurors
answer
inquiry
relevance
trial
decision
question
invidious
discriminatory
purpose
may
often
inferred
totality
relevant
facts
including
fact
true
classification
bears
heavily
one
race
another
washington
davis
prosecutor
articulates
basis
peremptory
challenge
results
disproportionate
exclusion
members
certain
race
trial
judge
may
consider
fact
evidence
prosecutor
stated
reason
constitutes
pretext
racial
discrimination
context
trial
prosecutor
frank
admission
ground
excusing
jurors
related
ability
speak
understand
spanish
raised
plausible
though
necessary
inference
language
might
pretext
fact
peremptory
challenges
case
rare
coincidence
juror
happened
speak
language
key
witness
community
others
spoke
tongue
explanation
juror
undue
influence
jury
deliberations
might
accepted
without
concern
racial
generalization
come
play
trial
took
place
community
substantial
latino
population
petitioner
interested
parties
members
ethnic
group
common
knowledge
locality
significant
percentage
latino
population
speaks
fluent
spanish
many
consider
preferred
language
one
chosen
personal
communication
one
selected
speaking
precision
power
one
used
define
self
trial
judge
consider
factors
deciding
whether
prosecutor
intended
discriminate
example
though
petitioner
suggest
alternative
trial
jurors
permitted
advise
judge
discreet
way
concerns
translation
course
trial
prosecutor
persistence
desire
exclude
jurors
despite
measure
taken
account
determining
whether
accept
explanation
challenge
trial
judge
case
chose
believe
prosecutor
explanation
striking
two
jurors
question
rejecting
petitioner
assertion
reasons
pretextual
batson
explained
trial
decision
ultimate
question
discriminatory
intent
represents
finding
fact
sort
accorded
great
deference
appeal
recent
title
vii
sex
discrimination
case
stated
finding
intentional
discrimination
finding
fact
entitled
appropriate
deference
reviewing
anderson
bessemer
city
since
trial
judge
findings
context
consideration
largely
turn
evaluation
credibility
reviewing
ordinarily
give
findings
great
deference
batson
supra
deference
trial
findings
issue
discriminatory
intent
makes
particular
sense
context
noted
batson
finding
largely
turn
evaluation
credibility
typical
peremptory
challenge
inquiry
decisive
question
whether
counsel
explanation
peremptory
challenge
believed
seldom
much
evidence
bearing
issue
best
evidence
often
demeanor
attorney
exercises
challenge
state
mind
juror
evaluation
prosecutor
state
mind
based
demeanor
credibility
lies
peculiarly
within
trial
judge
province
wainwright
witt
citing
patton
yount
precise
formula
used
review
fact
findings
course
depends
context
anderson
federal
civil
case
explained
federal
appellate
reviews
finding
district
question
intent
discriminate
federal
rule
civil
procedure
permits
factual
findings
set
aside
clearly
erroneous
comparable
rule
exists
federal
criminal
cases
held
standard
apply
review
findings
criminal
cases
issues
guilt
maine
taylor
campbell
see
also
wright
federal
practice
procedure
ed
supp
federal
habeas
review
state
conviction
requires
federal
courts
accord
factual
findings
presumption
correctness
case
comes
us
direct
review
judgment
statute
rule
governs
review
facts
found
state
courts
cases
posture
reasons
justifying
deferential
standard
review
contexts
however
apply
equal
force
review
state
trial
findings
fact
made
connection
federal
constitutional
claim
cases
indicated
absence
exceptional
circumstances
defer
factual
findings
even
findings
relate
constitutional
issue
see
liquor
duffy
california
liquor
dealers
assn
midcal
aluminum
see
also
time
firestone
general
motors
washington
quoting
norton
department
revenue
bantam
books
sullivan
lloyd
fry
roofing
wood
moreover
issue
lose
factual
character
merely
resolution
dispositive
ultimate
constitutional
question
miller
fenton
supra
citing
dayton
bd
ed
brinkman
supra
petitioner
advocates
independent
appellate
review
trial
rejection
batson
claim
difficulty
understanding
nature
review
petitioner
us
conduct
petitioner
explains
ndependent
review
requires
appellate
accept
findings
historical
fact
credibility
lower
unless
clearly
erroneous
based
facts
appellate
independently
determines
whether
discrimination
reply
brief
petitioner
appellate
accepts
trial
finding
prosecutor
explanation
peremptory
challenges
believed
fail
see
appellate
nevertheless
find
discrimination
credibility
prosecutor
explanation
goes
heart
equal
protection
analysis
settled
seems
nothing
left
review
petitioner
seeks
support
argument
bose
consumers
union
miller
fenton
supra
bose
dealt
review
trial
finding
actual
malice
first
amendment
precondition
liability
defamation
case
holding
appellate
must
exercise
independent
judgment
determine
whether
record
establishes
actual
malice
convincing
clarity
miller
accorded
similar
treatment
finding
confession
voluntary
cases
relevance
matter
us
turn
determination
findings
voluntariness
actual
malice
involve
legal
well
factual
elements
see
miller
supra
bose
supra
see
also
communications
connaughton
question
whether
evidence
record
defamation
case
sufficient
support
finding
actual
malice
question
law
whether
prosecutor
intended
discriminate
basis
race
challenging
potential
jurors
batson
recognized
question
historical
fact
petitioner
also
looks
line
decisions
reviewing
challenges
jury
selection
procedures
many
cases
following
norris
alabama
emphasized
duty
analyze
facts
order
appropriate
enforcement
federal
right
may
assured
make
independent
inquiry
determination
disputed
facts
pierre
louisiana
see
whitus
georgia
avery
georgia
patton
mississippi
smith
texas
review
provided
cases
however
leaves
room
deference
factual
determinations
particular
issues
credibility
instance
akins
texas
said
transcript
evidence
presents
certain
inconsistencies
conflicts
testimony
regard
limiting
number
negroes
grand
jury
therefore
trier
fact
heard
witnesses
full
observed
demeanor
stand
better
opportunity
reviewing
reach
correct
conclusion
existence
type
discrimination
duty
reviewing
conviction
upon
complaint
procedure
obtained
violates
due
process
equal
protection
fourteenth
amendment
calls
examination
evidence
determine
whether
federal
constitutional
right
denied
expressly
substance
effect
norris
alabama
smith
texas
accord
examination
great
respect
conclusions
state
judiciary
pierre
louisiana
respect
leads
us
accept
conclusion
trier
disputed
issues
unless
lacking
support
evidence
give
effect
work
fundamental
unfairness
war
due
process
lisenba
california
equal
protection
cf
ashcraft
tennessee
malinski
new
york
case
us
decline
overturn
state
trial
finding
issue
discriminatory
intent
unless
convinced
determination
clearly
erroneous
pervert
concept
federalism
bose
supra
conduct
searching
review
findings
made
state
trial
conduct
respect
federal
district
findings
general
matter
think
norris
line
cases
reconcilable
clear
error
standard
review
cases
evidence
reviewing
entire
evidence
left
definite
firm
conviction
mistake
ha
committed
gypsum
instance
norris
uncontradicted
testimony
showed
negro
served
grand
petit
jury
jackson
county
alabama
within
memory
witnesses
lived
lives
see
also
avery
georgia
supra
patton
mississippi
supra
smith
texas
supra
circumstances
finding
discrimination
simply
incredible
accepted
discern
clear
error
state
trial
determination
prosecutor
discriminate
basis
ethnicity
latino
jurors
said
two
permissible
views
evidence
factfinder
choice
clearly
erroneous
anderson
bessemer
city
trial
took
permissible
view
evidence
crediting
prosecutor
explanation
apart
prosecutor
demeanor
course
opportunity
review
relied
facts
prosecutor
defended
use
peremptory
challenges
without
asked
judge
know
jurors
latinos
ethnicity
victims
prosecution
witnesses
tended
undercut
motive
exclude
latinos
jury
factors
taken
evidence
prosecutor
sincerity
trial
moreover
rely
fact
three
challenged
jurors
confidence
identified
latinos
prosecutor
verifiable
legitimate
explanation
two
challenges
given
factors
prosecutor
also
excluded
one
two
latino
venirepersons
basis
subjective
criterion
disproportionate
impact
latinos
leave
us
definite
firm
conviction
mistake
committed
gypsum
supra
language
permits
individual
express
personal
identity
membership
community
share
common
language
may
interact
ways
intimate
without
bond
bilinguals
sense
inhabit
two
communities
serve
bring
closer
indeed
scholarly
comment
suggests
people
proficient
two
languages
may
times
think
one
language
exclusion
analogy
combines
ability
sprint
jump
accomplish
third
feat
characteristics
rather
two
separate
functions
grosjean
bilingual
competent
specific
multilingual
multicultural
development
say
cognitive
processes
reactions
speak
two
languages
susceptible
easy
generalization
even
term
bilingual
describe
uniform
category
simple
word
complex
phenomenon
many
distinct
categories
subdivisions
sanchez
linguistic
social
context
spanish
amastae
eds
dodson
second
language
acquisition
bilingual
development
theoretical
framework
multilingual
multicultural
development
decision
today
imply
exclusion
bilinguals
jury
service
wise
even
constitutional
cases
harsh
paradox
one
may
become
proficient
enough
english
participate
trial
see
ability
required
federal
jury
service
encounter
disqualification
knows
second
language
well
observed
somewhat
related
context
mere
knowledge
foreign
language
reasonably
regarded
harmful
heretofore
commonly
looked
upon
helpful
desirable
meyer
nebraska
shared
language
serve
foster
community
language
differences
source
division
language
elicits
response
others
ranging
admiration
respect
distance
alienation
ridicule
scorn
reactions
latter
type
often
result
initiate
racial
hostility
holding
reason
peremptory
challenge
means
reason
race
resolve
difficult
question
breadth
concept
race
defined
equal
protection
purposes
face
quite
different
case
prosecutor
justified
peremptory
challenges
explanation
want
jurors
may
well
certain
ethnic
groups
communities
proficiency
particular
language
like
skin
color
treated
surrogate
race
equal
protection
analysis
cf
yu
cong
eng
trinidad
law
prohibiting
keeping
business
records
specified
languages
violated
equal
protection
rights
chinese
businessmen
meyer
nebraska
supra
striking
law
prohibiting
grade
schools
teaching
languages
english
make
clear
policy
striking
speak
given
language
without
regard
particular
circumstances
trial
individual
responses
jurors
may
found
trial
judge
pretext
racial
discrimination
case
us
iii
find
error
application
new
york
courts
batson
analysis
standard
inquiry
objecting
party
prima
facie
case
unnecessary
given
course
proceedings
trial
state
courts
came
proper
conclusion
prosecutor
offered
basis
exercise
peremptory
challenges
trial
commit
clear
error
choosing
believe
reasons
given
prosecutor
affirmed
footnotes
felt
answers
hard
pressed
accept
interpreter
said
final
thing
record
even
ask
judge
question
answers
thought
indicated
trouble
although
final
answer
felt
hesitancy
answers
lack
eye
contact
able
app
trial
judge
appears
accepted
prosecutor
reasoning
motivation
response
charge
defense
counsel
prosecutor
excluded
latino
jurors
fear
sympathize
defendant
judge
stated
victims
hispanics
said
therefore
testifying
people
sympathy
well
defendant
said
seem
logical
case
look
throw
hispanics
think
logic
wrong
might
feel
sorry
guy
bullet
hole
hispanic
may
relate
relate
shooter
respondent
cites
perez
illustrates
sort
problems
may
arise
juror
fails
accept
official
translation
foreign
language
testimony
perez
following
interchange
occurred
dorothy
kim
juror
honor
proper
ask
interpreter
question
uncertain
word
la
vado
sic
say
bar
permit
jurors
ask
questions
directly
want
phrase
question
dorothy
kim
understood
restroom
better
believe
meet
restroom
rather
public
bar
undercover
matters
consider
misunderstanding
witness
testified
tell
understand
place
dorothy
kim
understand
word
la
vado
sic
thought
meant
restroom
translates
bar
ianziti
first
place
jurors
listen
spanish
english
certified
interpreter
dorothy
kim
idiot
justice
justice
scalia
joins
concurring
judgment
agree
plurality
review
clear
error
trial
finding
discriminatory
intent
agree
analysis
issue
agree
also
finding
discriminatory
intent
clearly
erroneous
case
write
separately
believe
plurality
opinion
goes
needs
assessing
constitutionality
prosecutor
asserted
justification
peremptory
strikes
upon
resolution
factfinding
questions
case
straightforward
hernandez
asserts
equal
protection
violation
rule
batson
kentucky
order
demonstrate
violation
hernandez
must
prove
prosecutor
intentionally
discriminated
hispanic
jurors
basis
race
trial
found
prosecutor
intent
determination
clearly
erroneous
hernandez
failed
meet
burden
unwavering
line
cases
holds
violation
equal
protection
clause
requires
state
action
motivated
discriminatory
intent
disproportionate
effects
state
action
sufficient
establish
violation
washington
davis
explained
cases
embraced
proposition
law
official
act
without
regard
whether
reflects
racially
discriminatory
purpose
unconstitutional
solely
racially
disproportionate
impact
defendant
alleges
equal
protection
violation
burden
proving
existence
purposeful
discrimination
mccleskey
kemp
see
also
arlington
heights
metropolitan
housing
development
keyes
school
dist
denver
wright
rockefeller
recognized
discriminatory
intent
requirement
explicitly
context
jury
selection
thus
purpose
discriminate
must
present
may
proven
systematic
exclusion
eligible
jurymen
proscribed
race
unequal
application
law
extent
show
intentional
discrimination
akins
texas
see
also
alexander
louisiana
whitus
georgia
norris
alabama
neal
delaware
point
made
clearly
batson
equal
protection
case
burden
course
defendant
alleges
discriminatory
selection
prove
existence
purposeful
discrimination
quoting
whitus
supra
consistent
established
equal
protection
jurisprudence
peremptory
strike
constitute
batson
violation
prosecutor
struck
juror
juror
race
equal
protection
clause
forbids
prosecutor
challenge
potential
jurors
solely
account
race
assumption
hispanic
jurors
group
unable
impartially
consider
state
case
batson
supra
emphasis
added
see
also
powers
ohio
equal
protection
clause
prohibits
prosecutor
using
state
peremptory
challenges
exclude
otherwise
qualified
unbiased
persons
petit
jury
solely
reason
race
batson
requirement
explanation
means
explanation
race
washington
davis
supra
outlined
dangers
rule
allow
equal
protection
violation
finding
mere
disproportionate
effect
rule
give
rise
unending
stream
constitutional
challenges
rule
state
action
designed
serve
neutral
ends
nevertheless
invalid
absent
compelling
justification
practice
benefits
burdens
one
race
another
far
reaching
raise
serious
questions
perhaps
invalidate
whole
range
tax
welfare
public
service
regulatory
licensing
statutes
may
burdensome
poor
average
black
affluent
white
case
prosecutor
asserted
justification
striking
certain
hispanic
jurors
uncertainty
jurors
ability
accept
official
translation
trial
testimony
app
truly
purpose
strikes
strikes
race
therefore
violate
equal
protection
clause
batson
may
acted
like
strikes
based
race
based
race
matter
closely
tied
significantly
correlated
race
explanation
peremptory
strike
may
strike
implicate
equal
protection
clause
unless
based
race
distinction
disproportionate
effect
sufficient
constitute
equal
protection
violation
intentional
discrimination
disproportionate
effect
may
course
constitute
evidence
intentional
discrimination
trial
may
effect
disbelieve
prosecutor
find
asserted
justification
merely
pretext
intentional
discrimination
see
batson
supra
case
trial
believes
prosecutor
nonracial
justification
finding
clearly
erroneous
end
matter
batson
require
prosecutor
justify
jury
strike
level
challenge
also
require
justification
unrelated
race
batson
requires
prosecutor
reason
striking
juror
juror
race
justice
blackmun
dissenting
justice
stevens
justice
marshall
joins
dissenting
violation
equal
protection
clause
requires
cases
characterize
proof
discriminatory
purpose
definition
however
prima
facie
case
one
established
requisite
proof
invidious
intent
unless
prosecutor
comes
forward
explanation
peremptories
sufficient
rebut
prima
facie
case
additional
evidence
racial
animus
required
establish
equal
protection
violation
opinion
therefore
errs
concludes
defendant
batson
challenge
fails
whenever
prosecutor
advances
nonpretextual
justification
facially
discriminatory
batson
kentucky
held
pattern
strikes
black
jurors
included
particular
venire
might
give
rise
inference
discrimination
sufficient
satisfy
defendant
burden
proving
equal
protection
violation
defendant
makes
prima
facie
showing
burden
shifts
state
come
forward
neutral
explanation
ibid
prosecutor
offers
explanation
defendant
succeeded
establishing
equal
protection
violation
based
evidence
invidious
intent
gave
rise
prima
facie
case
prosecutor
seeks
dispel
inference
discriminatory
intent
order
succeed
explanation
need
rise
level
justifying
exercise
challenge
cause
ibid
however
prosecutor
justification
must
identify
legitimate
reasons
related
particular
case
tried
sufficiently
persuasive
rebu
defendant
prima
facie
case
avowed
justification
significant
disproportionate
impact
rarely
qualify
legitimate
reason
sufficient
rebut
prima
facie
case
disparate
impact
evidence
discriminatory
purpose
see
arlington
heights
metropolitan
housing
development
washington
davis
explanation
based
concern
easily
accommodated
means
less
drastic
excluding
challenged
venireperson
petit
jury
also
generally
qualify
legitimate
reason
fact
related
particular
case
tried
batson
see
albemarle
paper
moody
availability
nondiscriminatory
alternative
evidence
discriminatory
motive
cf
also
richmond
croson
state
make
distinctions
equally
effective
nondiscriminatory
alternatives
equal
protection
challenge
government
classification
justification
frivolous
illegitimate
suffice
rebut
prima
facie
case
see
cleburne
cleburne
living
center
stevens
concurring
western
southern
life
insurance
state
bd
equalization
stevens
dissenting
explanation
matter
insubstantial
matter
great
disparate
impact
rebut
prima
facie
inference
discrimination
provided
explanation
facially
discriminatory
equal
protection
clause
vain
illusory
requirement
batson
quoting
norris
alabama
mistakenly
believes
compelled
reach
result
equal
protection
violation
requires
discriminatory
purpose
see
ante
overlooks
however
fact
discriminatory
purpose
characterizes
violations
equal
protection
clause
sometimes
established
objective
evidence
consistent
decisionmaker
honest
belief
motive
entirely
benign
frequently
probative
evidence
intent
objective
evidence
actually
happened
washington
davis
stevens
concurring
including
evidence
disparate
impact
see
yick
wo
hopkins
gomillion
lightfoot
sims
georgia
turner
fouche
line
discriminatory
purpose
discriminatory
impact
neither
bright
critical
appears
believe
therefore
errs
focusing
entire
inquiry
subjective
state
mind
prosecutor
jury
selection
challenges
requisite
invidious
intent
established
defendant
makes
prima
facie
case
additional
evidence
intent
necessary
unless
explanation
provided
prosecutor
sufficiently
powerful
rebut
prima
facie
proof
discriminatory
purpose
requiring
prosecutor
explanation
provide
additional
direct
evidence
discriminatory
motive
imposed
defendant
added
requirement
generate
evidence
prosecutor
actual
subjective
intent
discriminate
neither
batson
equal
protection
holdings
demand
heightened
quantum
proof
ii
applying
principles
outlined
facts
case
reject
prosecutor
explanation
without
reaching
question
whether
explanation
pretextual
neither
respondent
disputes
petitioner
made
prima
facie
case
see
ante
even
assuming
prosecutor
explanation
rebuttal
advanced
good
faith
justification
proffered
insufficient
dispel
existing
inference
racial
animus
prosecutor
explanation
insufficient
three
reasons
first
justification
inevitably
result
disproportionate
disqualification
venirepersons
explanation
race
neutral
face
nonetheless
unacceptable
merely
proxy
discriminatory
practice
second
prosecutor
concern
easily
accommodated
less
drastic
means
practice
many
jurisdictions
jury
instructed
official
translation
alone
evidence
bilingual
jurors
instructed
bring
attention
judge
disagreements
might
translation
disputes
resolved
see
perez
third
prosecutor
concern
valid
substantiated
record
supported
challenge
cause
fact
prosecutor
make
challenge
see
app
disqualify
advancing
concern
justification
peremptory
challenge
reasons
considered
alone
might
render
insufficient
prosecutor
facially
neutral
explanation
combination
however
persuade
explanation
rejected
matter
law
accordingly
respectfully
dissent
washington
davis
concurring
opinion
noted
term
purposeful
discrimination
used
many
different
contexts
although
may
proper
use
language
describe
constitutional
claim
contexts
burden
proving
prima
facie
case
may
well
involve
differing
evidentiary
considerations
extent
deference
one
pays
trial
determination
factual
issue
indeed
extent
one
characterizes
intent
issue
question
fact
question
law
vary
different
contexts
frequently
probative
evidence
intent
objective
evidence
actually
happened
rather
evidence
describing
subjective
state
mind
actor
point
making
observation
suggest
line
discriminatory
purpose
discriminatory
impact
nearly
bright
perhaps
quite
critical
reader
opinion
might
assume
agree
course
constitutional
issue
arise
every
time
disproportionate
impact
shown
hand
disproportion
dramatic
gomillion
lightfoot
yick
wo
hopkins
really
matter
whether
standard
phrased
terms
purpose
effect
even
effective
solution
employ
translator
person
hears
witness
words
simultaneously
translates
english
thus
permitting
jury
hear
official
translation