Whether the (Court's) failure to specifically find that the prosecution had made a preliminary showing of racial discrimination when denying a criminal defendant's peremptory strike violates Batson/McCollum and Petitioner's right to a fair trial by an impartial jury of Petitioner's choosing?

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED . 1. Whether the (Court's) failure to specifically find that = © ; the prosecution had made a preliminary showing of racial discrimi7 nation when denying a criminal defendant's peremptory strike viol-ates Batson/McCollum and Petitioner's right to a fair trial by an ; ' impartial jury of Petitioner's choosing? oO oo : 2. Whether the (Court's) rejection of a criminal defendant's race-neutral explanation as "not a good reason" or "speculation ; : and intution" are contrary to this Court's admonition’ in Purkett, : -. at 768, violating Batson/McColium and Petitioner's vight to a-fair trial by an impartial jury of Petitioner's choosing? -2" ae a 3. Whether the (Court's) determination that ‘the ‘proponent of a peremptory strike should "do more to establish bias" in favor of .. the objector, improperly shifts the burden to prove the strike is ; . “not motivated by racial discrimination is incwiolation of Purkett, : . = Batson/MeCol lum and Petitioner's right to a fair trial by an impa. * rtial jury of Petitioner's choosing? . _ . RY : . ' . } . . 4 | | |