Johnson, et al. v. Finn, et al., No. 10-15641 (9th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this CasePetitioners challenged the prosecution's use of peremptory strikes to exclude black jurors in their trial. A magistrate judge, after holding an evidentiary hearing at which the prosecutor testified, found that he had purposefully discriminated on the basis of race in exercising a peremptory strike against one of the black jurors. The district judge, without holding a new evidentiary hearing, rejected the magistrate judge's finding as to the prosecutor's lack of credibility in asserting race-neutral reasons for having stricken the juror. In doing so, the district judge denied petitioners the process that they were constitutionally due. The court held that the rule of United States v. Ridgeway extended to determinations by a magistrate judge as to the credibility of a prosecutor's testimony at the second and third steps of the inquiry required by Batson v. Kentucky. Therefore, the district court erred in declining the opportunity to observe the trial prosecutor's demeanor before rejecting the magistrate judge's adverse credibility finding. The court vacated the district court's denial of the writ of habeas corpus and remanded for the district judge either to accept the magistrate judge's credibility finding or to conduct a new evidentiary hearing.
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.