Washington v. Roberts, 846 F.3d 1283

Background

Marcus Washington was convicted in Kansas of first-degree premeditated murder and firearm possession for a January 2000 shooting; sentenced to life without parole for 50 years; state courts affirmed and reimposed sentence on remand.
In his federal habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Washington raised four claims: Batson challenge to prosecutor’s racial peremptory strikes; Miranda violation for pre-warning custodial interrogation; ineffective assistance for counsel’s failure to testify at suppression hearing; and prosecutorial misconduct in closing regarding a PTSD/mental-disease defense.
At trial the prosecutor used 10 of 12 peremptory strikes on African-American prospective jurors; Washington objected under Batson after voir dire; trial court denied Batson objection and empaneled a jury with two Black jurors.
The Kansas Supreme Court affirmed, finding facially valid race-neutral explanations for the strikes (and relying on Kansas precedent that facially valid nonracial reasons defeat Batson unless the strike was made solely for race).
On Miranda, detectives questioned Washington at the station after he voluntarily went with them; Miranda warnings were given before the confession; Kansas courts found he was not in custody at the outset.
On ineffective assistance, a post-trial motion hearing found Washington’s testimony not credible; on prosecutorial misconduct the state courts held any error was cured or not prejudicial given instructions.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Batson peremptory strikes	Prosecutor struck Black jurors for race; reasons were pretextual	Prosecutor gave facially race-neutral reasons (prior jury responses, residence, questionnaire errors, youth, sympathy risks)	AEDPA deference: Kansas standard (sole-motivation focus) was not an unreasonable application of then-existing Supreme Court precedent; state courts reasonably credited prosecutor credibility and factual bases — claim denied
Miranda custodial interrogation	Washington was in custody when first questioned and Miranda warnings came too late	He went voluntarily to the bureau, waited in a victim’s room, was not handcuffed or arrested, and was read Miranda before confession	Kansas court’s factual finding that he was not in custody was reasonable; no relief under § 2254
Ineffective assistance for not testifying at suppression hearing	Trial counsel should have called Washington to support custody claim; omission prejudiced suppression ruling	Postconviction hearing found Washington’s account not credible; no reasonable probability of different outcome	No Strickland prejudice shown; state court reasonably denied claim
Prosecutorial misconduct in closing	Prosecutor's remarks attacked mental-disease defense and were inflammatory	Trial court sustained one objection, admonished jury; second remark not prejudicial given instructions and context	No Supreme Court precedent requires reversal; comments not sufficiently prejudicial — claim denied

Key Cases Cited

Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (Equal Protection forbids purposeful racial exclusion in peremptory strikes)
Snyder v. Louisiana, 552 U.S. 472 (credibility and demeanor central in Batson review)
Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (custodial interrogation requires warnings)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (two-part ineffective-assistance test)
Darden v. Wainwright, 477 U.S. 168 (prosecutorial remarks require prejudice, not merely impropriety)
Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322 (emphasis on assessing prosecutor credibility in Batson context)
Holland v. Jackson, 542 U.S. 649 (state-court decisions must be read reasonably under AEDPA)
Davis v. Ayala, 135 S. Ct. 2187 (trial-court credibility findings on peremptory challenges entitled to deference)
Hernandez v. New York, 500 U.S. 352 (trial-court deference on discriminatory intent findings)
Akins v. Easterling, 648 F.3d 380 (circuit-level discussion on sole-motivation vs. mixed-motive analysis in Batson claims)