Broom v. Denney, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 20814

Broom was convicted in Missouri state court of first-degree murder, first-degree assault, and two counts of armed criminal action.
Missouri Court of Appeals affirmed; state post-conviction relief was denied; Broom filed a federal habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254.
Broom, an African American, alleged the prosecution used racially charged peremptory challenges during jury selection.
During voir dire, the prosecutor struck one black juror, Patricia Wright, citing her son's incarceration; three black and three white venire members were struck overall.
The prosecutor provided race-neutral justifications for strikes; the trial court and Missouri appellate courts ultimately found the reasons not pretextual.
In the federal habeas proceeding, the district court denied relief but issued a certificate of appealability on the Batson claim.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the strike of Wright was race-neutral	Broom argues Wright's strike was pretextual based on racial discrimination.	Missouri court held Wright's incarceration rationale race-neutral and not pretextual.	No reversible error; reasons for strike deemed race-neutral.
Whether the state court unreasonably determined the similarly situated standard at step three	Francis and Johnston were sufficiently similar to Wright to show discrimination if strikes were selective.	The state court properly found not similarly situated due to differing circumstances and behaviors.	Not unreasonable; court deferentially upheld factual findings.
Whether the proffered reasons for strikes, including disparate impact concerns, establish pretext	Statistics show blacks are incarcerated at higher rates, implying pretext.	National statistics do not prove state court error; no pattern of discrimination shown in record.	No § 2254(d)(2) or (d)(1) error; no unreasonable application of law.

Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (U.S. 1986) (three-step Batson framework for peremptory challenges)
Miller-El v. Cockrell (Miller-El I), 537 U.S. 322 (U.S. 2003) (establishes prima facie case and shifting burden)
Miller-El v. Dretke (Miller-El II), 545 U.S. 231 (U.S. 2005) (pattern of discrimination; totality of circumstances)
Snyder v. Louisiana, 552 U.S. 472 (U.S. 2008) (circumstances bearing on racial animus may support discrimination finding)
United States v. Wiggins, 104 F.3d 174 (8th Cir. 1997) (incarceration of a family member as race-neutral justification)
Rice v. Collins, 546 U.S. 333 (U.S. 2006) (unreasonable application standard in AEDPA review)
Taylor v. Roper, 577 F.3d 848 (8th Cir. 2009) (deference to state court factual determinations in Batson analysis)
Smulls v. Roper, 535 F.3d 853 (8th Cir. 2008) (unreasonable crediting of race-neutral explanations standard)
Cole v. Roper, 623 F.3d 1183 (8th Cir. 2010) (pre-Miller-El timing of state court decision on Batson claim)
Nicklasson v. Roper, 491 F.3d 830 (8th Cir. 2007) (Miller-El II totality of the circumstances applied)