U.S. v. Howard

In prosecution on charge of felon in possession of weapon charge, Dist. Ct. did not err in rejecting defendant’s Batson challenge to prosecutor’s use of peremptory challenge against one black juror, under circumstances where: (1) prosecutor struck all three black jurors in 39-person venire panel; (2) said juror claimed that she did not use internet in response to Dist. Ct. admonishment to venire that they not use internet for any purpose related to or surrounding case; and (3) prosecutor explained that he struck juror because he did not believe people when they said that they do not use internet. While Dist. Ct. made observation when evaluating prosecutor’s explanation for use of said peremptory challenge that prosecutor was also African-American, no part of Dist. Ct.’s reasoning relied on race of prosecutor as reason to deny defendant’s challenge. Moreover, Dist. Ct. could properly find that prosecutor was credible in claim that he uses confessed internet usage as proxy for truthfulness, and that prosecutor has per se rule that he does not believe those who may deny internet usage. Fact that prosecutor might be incorrect that jurors denying using internet are lying does not require different result, where prosecutor’s theory is not so improbable that no reasonable jurist could have found it credible.