Jose Gerardo Espiritu was convicted in 2015 of forcible rape, forcible copulation and forcible sodomy of a minor after prosecutors alleged he sexually assaulted a 16-year-old girl. During jury selection, the prosecutor used a peremptory challenge to excuse a prospective juror who identified herself as a nurse, stating the reason for the challenge was simply "because she is a nurse."
Defense counsel objected under California Code of Civil Procedure Section 231.7, but the trial court overruled the objection without examining whether the prosecutor's reason might be presumptively invalid. The statute lists 13 presumptively invalid reasons for peremptory challenges, including "employment in a field that is disproportionately occupied by members" of protected groups.
The court held that the trial court failed to follow the comprehensive process mandated by Section 231.7. "Part and parcel of a trial court's obligation to evaluate proffered reasons for the exercise of a peremptory challenge is to first make a meaningful inquiry into whether any of the proffered reasons may be presumptively invalid," the court wrote.
The court rejected the state's argument that Espiritu forfeited his challenge by not specifically raising the presumptive invalidity issue at trial. "Finding forfeiture under such circumstances would run counter to the comprehensive scheme adopted by the Legislature and the purpose underlying it," the court wrote.
The case arose after Espiritu fled following his initial arrest and arraignment in 2015, only to be apprehended by U.S. Marshals at Los Angeles International Airport six and a half years later. During voir dire, prospective juror 183 disclosed she was a recently graduated nurse whose father was serving a life sentence for murder.
The court ordered automatic reversal under Section 231.7, which requires reversal of any erroneous denial of an objection. The case now returns to Orange County Superior Court for a new trial on charges that carried a sentence of 26 years in prison.