State v. Jose A. B.

Summary

The court affirmed the defendant’s convictions, holding that the prosecutor’s peremptory challenges did not establish purposeful racial discrimination under the existing Batson framework and that the challenged offenses were not the same offense for double-jeopardy purposes. The court declined to decide whether the Connecticut constitution provides greater protection against peremptory challenges based on distrust of law enforcement, leaving that issue for the ongoing rule-making process. No separate opinions were filed.