Is a defendant permitted to use a peremptory challenge against a prospective juror?

Defendant also asserts the prosecutor's use of peremptory challenges must be subject to comparative juror analysis. "[E]vidence of comparative juror analysis must be considered in the trial court and even for the first time on appeal if relied upon by defendant and the record is adequate to permit the urged comparisons." ( Lenix, supra, 44 Cal.4th at p. 622, 80 Cal.Rptr.3d 98, 187 P.3d 946, italics added.) "[C]omparative juror analysis is but one form of circumstantial evidence that is relevant, but not necessarily dispositive, on the issue of intentional discrimination." ( Ibid. ) "The rationale for comparative juror analysis is that a side-by-side comparison [of the characteristics and voir dire responses] of a prospective juror struck by the prosecutor with a prospective juror accepted by the prosecutor may provide relevant circumstantial evidence of purposeful discrimination by the prosecutor." ( People v. DeHoyos (2013) 57 Cal.4th 79, 109, 158 Cal.Rptr.3d 797, 303 P.3d 1.)

[200 Cal.Rptr.3d 508]