Aleman v. Uribe, No. 09-55837 (9th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this CasePetitioners appealed separate decisions denying their 28 U.S.C. 2254 habeas petitions, alleging that their convictions were secured in violation of Batson v. Kentucky. At issue was whether a state court violated a defendant's constitutional rights by denying a Batson motion based on a prosecutor's credible explanation that he or she made an honest mistake in exercising a peremptory challenge to dismiss the wrong juror. The court concluded that it was not objectively unreasonable for the California Court of Appeal to affirm the trial court's Batson ruling on the ground that an honest mistake was not evidence of racial bias. Accordingly, the court affirmed the district court's denial of habeas corpus relief.
Court Description: Habeas Corpus. Affirming the district court’s denial of a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition raising a challenge under Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986), the panel held that a state court does not violate a defendant’s constitutional rights by denying a Batson motion based on a prosecutor’s credible explanation that he or she made an honest mistake in exercising a peremptory challenge to dismiss the wrong juror.
The court issued a subsequent related opinion or order on July 16, 2013.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.