State v. Bourque, 114 So. 3d 642

Bourque was charged with failure to renew his registration as a sex offender (La.R.S. 15:542.1.1) and failure to notify law enforcement of a change in address or registration information (La.R.S. 15:542.1.2; amended bill of information).
A jury convicted Bourque on both counts; the trial court sentenced him to eight years' hard labor on each count, concurrent, without probation, parole, or suspension.
The State alleged Bourque was late in reporting in October 2010 and, instead, reported November 19, 2010, and that he failed to notify about new employment within the three-day period.
The defendant's conviction and sentence were appealed, with the principal issue being the State's reverse-Batson challenge to defense-chosen voir dire strikes.
The appellate court vacated the convictions and sentences and remanded for further proceedings due to error in granting the State’s reverse-Batson challenge.
Dissenting notes in the opinion indicate a separate view that there was no reversible Batson error.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court erred in denying challenges for cause to jurors	State contends trial court properly denied challenges for cause.	Bourque asserts trial court erred in denying defense challenges for cause.	No determinable ruling here—court focuses on Batson error as dispositive.
Whether the State’s reverse-Batson challenge was proper	State argues Bourque used peremptory strikes discriminatorily against minority jurors, warranting reversal of defense challenges.	Bourque contends the State’s reverse-Batson motion was improper and the defense offered race-neutral explanations.	The court vacated convictions and sentences, holding reversal of the State’s reverse-Batson motion was improper and merits remand.
Whether the court erred in denying mistrial based on other-crimes evidence	State asserts admissibility justified and not prejudicial.	Bourque argues admission of other-crimes evidence prejudiced the defense and warranted mistrial.	Issue pretermitted due to ruling on reverse-Batson to vacate and remand.
Whether jury misconduct or Batson challenges affected the outcome	State defends its use of peremptory challenges.	Bourque claims improper Batson handling affected jury composition.	Court did not address further Batson arguments after finding reversible reverse-Batson error.

Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (U.S. Supreme Court, 1986) (race-based peremptory challenges violate Equal Protection)
J.E.B. v. Alabama ex rel. T.B., 511 U.S. 127 (U.S. Supreme Court, 1994) (gender discrimination in jury selection prohibited)
State v. Nelson, 85 So.3d 21 (La. 2012) (reverses reverse-Batson analysis; burden and credibility considerations discussed)
State v. Collier, 553 So.2d 815 (La. 1989) (peremptory challenges and cause-and-effect implications in Batson framework)
Hernandez v. New York, 500 U.S. 352 (U.S. Supreme Court, 1991) (discrimination requires discriminatory intent, not disproportionate impact)
Purkett v. Elem, 514 U.S. 765 (U.S. Supreme Court, 1995) (facially neutral reasons need not be persuasive for Batson; production of reasons)
State v. Givens, 776 So.2d 443 (La. 2001) (guidance on Batson framework and discriminatory intent)
State v. Coleman, 970 So.2d 511 (La. 2007) (body language as race-neutral basis for Batson)
State v. Sparks, 68 So.3d 435 (La. 2011) (Batson framework and discriminatory intent analysis)
State v. Knox, 609 So.2d 803 (La. 1992) (state may object to discriminatory peremptory challenges by minority defendants)