Roberts v. State, 411 P.3d 431

Defendant Brandon D. Roberts (African American) convicted of fourth-offense DWUI; sentenced to 3–5 years. Appeal challenges a peremptory strike during jury selection.
Two African American venirepersons were on a 31-person panel; the prosecutor peremptorily struck both; defense objected only to the second (Juror 364).
Record shows Juror 364 never spoke during voir dire; transcript does not attribute the statements the prosecutor later relied on to her.
At sidebar the prosecutor offered race-neutral reasons: Juror 364’s negative demeanor (grimacing, nodding, crossed arms, shifting, hat) and that she allegedly questioned the distinction between alcohol DWUI and other substances (the "bright line"/.08 issue).
The district court credited the prosecutor’s explanations and overruled the Batson objection. On appeal the Wyoming Supreme Court found the record supports only the demeanor-based reason and remanded for a new Batson hearing to reassess credibility given the prosecutor’s unsupported attribution of statements to Juror 364.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Roberts)	Defendant's Argument (State)	Held
Whether the district court clearly erred in allowing a peremptory strike of an African-American venireperson	The strike was racially motivated because Juror 364 never spoke; prosecutor's attribution of statements to her is unsupported and pretextual	The prosecutor offered race-neutral reasons (demeanor and a substantive question about DWUI) and the court properly credited them	Remanded for new Batson hearing — only demeanor-based reason is supported by record; district court must reassess prosecutor credibility and determine if strike would rest solely on demeanor

Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986) (establishes three-step test forbidding peremptory strikes based on race)
Snyder v. Louisiana, 552 U.S. 472 (2008) (trial court must show it credited demeanor-based explanation when prosecution offers mixed valid/invalid reasons)
Miller-El v. Dretke, 545 U.S. 231 (2005) (comparative juror analysis can show pretext when prosecutor’s reason applies equally to white jurors)
Purkett v. Elem, 514 U.S. 765 (1995) (prosecutor’s race-neutral explanation need only be facially valid)
Hernandez v. New York, 500 U.S. 352 (1991) (Batson framework articulated and applied)
Thaler v. Haynes, 559 U.S. 43 (2010) (trial judge may accept prosecutor’s demeanor-based account absent personal recollection)
Rice v. Collins, 546 U.S. 333 (2006) (trial judge is best placed to assess credibility underlying peremptory-strike explanations)
Swain v. Alabama, 380 U.S. 202 (1965) (historical context for peremptory challenges)