Defendant failed to meet his prima facie burden establishing “a substantial likelihood” that a violation of the RJA occurred (PC 745(c) & (h)(2)). Defendant presented evidence that (1) a juror stated during voir dire that he “grew up with racism”; (2) a prosecutor made public statements described as hateful toward African Americans; and (3) Black defendants in San Bernadino County received sentencing enhancements more frequently than White defendants. The Court found the juror’s testimony that he had overcome the racial bias demonstrated this was not evidence of bias toward defendant; the prosecutor had only appeared twice to continue the matter, therefore defendant did not demonstrate “more than a mere possibility” of bias in his case; and the statistic regarding sentencing enhancements was overbroad.

The full opinion is available on the court’s website here: https://www4.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/E087071.PDF