Supreme Court of California

Wheeler's terms, a "strong likelihood" and a "reasonable inference" refer to the same test, and this test is consistent with Batson. Batson does not require state reviewing courts to engage in comparative juror analysis for the first time on appeal, and defendant failed to establish a prima facie case of improper peremptory challenges.

Appellate Information

• Decided 06/30/2003
• Published 06/30/2003

Judges

• CHIN, J.

Court

• Supreme Court of California

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
•  Stephen B. Bedrick, under appointment by the Supreme Court, Oakland, for Defendant and Appellant., Bradley A. Bristow, Sacramento, for California Public Defenders Association as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Defendant and Appellant., Lynne S. Coffin, State Public Defender, Raoul D. Schonemann, Deputy State Public Defender;  and Alan L. Schlosser, for Office of the State Public Defender and American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California as Amici Curiae on behalf of Defendant and Appellant., Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, David P. Druliner and Robert R. Anderson, Chief Assistant Attorneys General, Ronald A. Bass and Gerald A. Engler, Assistant Attorneys General, Martin S. Kaye, Richard Rochman, Ronald S. Matthias, Catherine A. McBrien, Laurence K. Sullivan and Seth K. Schalit, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.