The issue to be briefed and argued is limited to the following: Did the trial court properly overrule defendant’s Code of Civil Procedure section 231.7 objection to the People’s peremptory challenge of a prospective juror?

Held: 

“We now clarify two general principles about behavior-based reasons under section 231.7, subdivision (g). First, to overcome the presumption that a behavior-based reason is invalid, the striking party must offer an explanation that is sufficient to allow the court to evaluate the reason as part of its overarching determination of whether an objective observer would view race or other protected status as a factor in the exercise of the peremptory challenge. …
Second, whether a behavior-based reason is found to be valid or invalid is not dispositive of the ultimate inquiry into the presence of unlawful discrimination. …[A] court still must consider any other reasons proffered and other relevant circumstances to determine whether the strike was unlawful under section 231.7.”

This case was decided on 7/30/26. J. Kruger authored the opinion.

Review on this issue had also been granted with briefing deferred in:

First District

• People v. Rosales (A167850) [nonpub. opn.], review granted 8/13/2025 (S291734)

Second District

• People v. Garcia (2025) 114 Cal.App.5th 1154, review granted 12/30/25 (S293973)