White defendants had standing to join the black defendants’ challenge because if the peremptory challenges were improperly used, the white defendants were treated differently because they were tried together with black defendants.United States v. Battle, 836 F.2d 1084 (8th Cir. 1987)The prosecutor’s use of five out of six peremptory challenges to strike five of seven blacks from the jury panel established the prima facie evidence of purposeful discrimination. Remand was required to afford the government the opportunity to set forth racially neutral reasons for its use of peremptory challenges.Garrett v. Morris, 815 F.2d 509 (8th Cir. 1987)The State violated Batson by the exercise of its preemptory challenges in a way that excluded all black jurors from the petit jury panel. The prosecutor’s stated reasons for excluding all black prospective jurors, that they lacked background, education and knowledge to understand the scientific evidence, was clearly a pretext for rank racial discrimination.Turner v. Marshall, 121 F.3d 1248 (9th Cir. 1997)Although the prosecutor did not utilize all of the state’s peremptory challenges and there were African-Americans left on the jury, the prosecutor failed to articulate race-neutral reasons for striking one of the African-American prospective jurors.