In re A.S.
2017 IL App (1st) 161259-B
Ill. App. Ct.2017Background
- A.S., a 17‑year‑old black juvenile, was charged with residential burglary and tried by jury; after conviction he was committed to juvenile corrections until age 21.
- During jury selection, the State used peremptory challenges to remove four black veniremembers, prompting a Batson challenge by respondent (A.S.).
- One struck juror, Connie T., failed to disclose a ~1977 theft matter on her questionnaire; she initially said she did not recall but then remembered when questioned in chambers by the court.
- The trial court declined to find cause to strike Connie T., called her omission an "honest mistake," yet the State later used a peremptory to remove her and did not articulate a race‑neutral reason at trial.
- On remand the State proffered for the first time that it struck Connie T. because it found her demeanor evasive and untruthful; the court credited the State and denied relief.
- The appellate court held the State’s demeanor‑based explanation for Connie T. was likely pretextual (particularly given the court’s earlier finding she was believable and the State’s inconsistent treatment of a similarly situated juror, Joe W.) and reversed for a new trial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (People) | Defendant's Argument (A.S.) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a prima facie Batson violation existed | The number and pattern of strikes did not alone show discrimination; State later offered race‑neutral reasons | Pattern of strikes and lack of contemporaneous race‑neutral explanations established prima facie case | Appellate court previously found prima facie established and retained jurisdiction; remand was proper |
| Whether the State’s race‑neutral reason for striking Connie T. was pretextual | The prosecutor believed Connie T. was evasive/untruthful when questioned in chambers, distinguishing her from other jurors | Trial court earlier found Connie T. believable; State’s inconsistent treatment of similarly situated jurors shows pretext | Court held the State’s demeanor‑based reason was pretextual and reversed for a new trial |
Key Cases Cited
- Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (constitutional prohibition on race‑based peremptory strikes)
- Rice v. Collins, 546 U.S. 333 (proponent of Batson bears burden of persuasion)
- Hernandez v. New York, 500 U.S. 352 (deference to trial court credibility findings on Batson reviewed for clear error)
- People v. Rivera, 221 Ill. 2d 481 (prima facie Batson showing standards)
- People v. Harris, 129 Ill. 2d 123 (third‑stage Batson analysis and court’s role in assessing credibility)
- People v. Williams, 209 Ill. 2d 227 (demeanor‑based explanations require close scrutiny)