988 N.W.2d 563
N.D.2023Background
- Feb. 20, 2021: a bar fight involving Grant and three others; bouncers broke it up and Grant fired shots outside, injuring three people.
- Grant indicted on three counts of attempted murder and three counts of aggravated assault; jury trial held May 2022.
- During voir dire the State used a peremptory strike on the only Black prospective juror; Grant raised a Batson challenge.
- The State justified the strike citing the juror’s “activism-type” shirt, eye-rolling, and body language; the district court found the explanations race-neutral and denied Batson.
- At trial only one of the three shooting victims testified; videos showed Grant following victims out a back door and firing while victims did not possess weapons or advance on him.
- Grant testified claiming self-defense; Rule 29 motion denied; jury convicted on all six counts and the Supreme Court of North Dakota affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of State's peremptory strike under Batson | Strike was race-neutral: juror’s activism-type shirt, eye-rolling, body language, and prosecutor’s instinct justified strike | Strike was pretextual and racially motivated because juror was the only Black panelist | Court held State’s reasons race-neutral; district court’s credibility finding not clearly erroneous; Batson challenge denied |
| Sufficiency of evidence / self-defense for counts 1,2,4,5 | Video, forensic, and witness evidence established guilt and rebutted self-defense (victims unarmed, shot while retreating) | Absent testimony from two alleged victims, self-defense went unrefuted and Rule 29 acquittal required | Court held evidence sufficient when viewed in light most favorable to verdict; self-defense not reasonably supported; convictions affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (U.S. 1986) (prohibits peremptory strikes based solely on race)
- Snyder v. Louisiana, 552 U.S. 472 (U.S. 2008) (explains Batson three-step framework)
- Hernandez v. New York, 500 U.S. 352 (U.S. 1991) (demeanor-based explanations evaluated by trial judge)
- Miller-El v. Dretke, 545 U.S. 231 (U.S. 2005) (addresses instinctive peremptory decisions and pretext scrutiny)
- Purkett v. Elem, 514 U.S. 765 (U.S. 1995) (race-neutral explanation need not be persuasive or plausible)
- Thaler v. Haynes, 559 U.S. 43 (U.S. 2010) (demeanor explanations need not be rejected if judge did not personally observe juror)
- Wainwright v. Witt, 469 U.S. 412 (U.S. 1985) (trial judge’s province to evaluate juror state of mind)
- United States v. Hampton, 887 F.3d 339 (8th Cir. 2018) (demeanor and body language can be legitimate reasons to strike)
- United States v. Ellison, 616 F.3d 829 (8th Cir. 2010) (eye-rolling and sighing may justify peremptory strike)
- United States v. Davidson, 449 F.3d 849 (8th Cir. 2006) (body language permissible basis for strike)
- City of Mandan v. Fern, 501 N.W.2d 739 (N.D. 1993) (prospective jurors’ responses and demeanor may constitute neutral explanations)
- State v. Stridiron, 777 N.W.2d 892 (N.D. 2010) (standard for clear-error review of factual findings)
- State v. Galvez, 858 N.W.2d 619 (N.D. 2015) (prosecutor’s explanation must be clear and specific)
- State v. Eggleston, 940 N.W.2d 645 (N.D. 2020) (sufficiency review and evidence negating self-defense)
- State v. Foster, 942 N.W.2d 829 (N.D. 2020) (construing sufficiency-of-evidence arguments on appeal)
- State v. Rai, 924 N.W.2d 410 (N.D. 2019) (defendant bears burden on sufficiency challenge)