Constantino Carrera v. Robert Ayers, Jr.
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 22772
9th Cir.2012Background
- Carrera was convicted in 1983 of first-degree murder with two victims during a robbery; co-defendant was a juvenile who received a 50-years-to-life sentence.
- Prosecutor peremptorily struck 6 of 8 Hispanics with surnames (75%) vs 11 of 41 white, non-Hispanic jurors (26%).
- No Wheeler objection was raised at trial; California Supreme Court later affirmed, finding harmless error on direct appeal.
- Carrera sought federal habeas relief; district court vacated his death sentence due to prosecutorial misconduct, and this appeal concerns ineffective assistance of counsel predicated on not objecting to Wheeler discrimination.
- Pre-AEDPA standard applied on habeas review; law evolving with Snow (1987) and Batson (1986) affecting prima facie showing; Wheeler’s strong likelihood standard governs this analysis for 1990 direct-review context.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether failure to object to Wheeler discrimination was ineffective assistance. | Carrera; would have succeeded on Wheeler claim if objected. | State; failure to object did not prejudice due to weak prima facie showing under Wheeler. | No prejudice shown under Wheeler as of 1990. |
| Whether the record would support a Wheeler prima facie case under 1990 law. | Six of eight Hispanics struck; possible lack of non-discriminatory reasons; one problematic strike. | Presence of two Hispanics seated does not negate prima facie under evolving Wheeler standards. | Record insufficient to establish a strong likelihood of discrimination under Wheeler (1990) for prejudice finding. |
| Whether prejudice exists for Strickland purposes given post-trial law changes. | Under Strickland, a reasonable probability exists that direct-review outcome would differ. | Prejudice not shown; record does not demonstrate likelihood of different result. | Carrera fails to show a reasonable probability of a different outcome; no habeas relief. |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Wheeler, 22 Cal.3d 258 (Cal. 1978) (prohibition on using peremptory challenges to strike jurors for group bias)
- Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (U.S. 1986) (racially discriminatory peremptory challenges violate Equal Protection)
- People v. Snow, 44 Cal.3d 216 (Cal. 1987) (overruled Boyd and Davis; presence of minority jurors does not automatically defeat Wheeler prima facie)
- Johnson v. California, 545 U.S. 162 (U.S. 2005) (Batson standards differ from Wheeler; Batson controls post-2005; Wheeler applied for pre-2005 context)
- Snow, People v., Snow, 44 Cal.3d 216 (Cal. 1987) (relevant to prima facie evaluation under Wheeler)
- People v. Allen, 23 Cal.3d 286 (Cal. 1979) (considerations for prima facie case under Wheeler)
- Turner v. California, 42 Cal.3d 711 (Cal. 1986) (factors for recognizing group bias considerations)
- Ledesma, 43 Cal.3d 171 (Cal. 1987) (one improper challenge can establish Wheeler violation)