What is the peremptory test for the purpose of excusing a prospective juror?

We are thus concerned with the third step of a Batson / Wheeler analysis. ( People v. Johnson (2015) 61 Cal.4th 734, 754755, 190 Cal.Rptr.3d 536, 353 P.3d 266.) "A prosecutor asked to explain his conduct must provide a "clear and reasonably specific" explanation of his "legitimate reasons" for exercising the challenges. [Citation.] The justification need not support a challenge for cause, and even a "trivial" reason, if genuine and neutral, will suffice. [Citation.] A prospective juror may be excused based upon facial expressions, gestures, hunches, and even for arbitrary or idiosyncratic reasons. [Citations.] Nevertheless, although a prosecutor may rely on any number of bases to select jurors, a legitimate reason is one that does not deny equal protection. [Citation.] Certainly a challenge based on racial prejudice would not be supported by a legitimate reason." ( Lenix, supra, 44 Cal.4th at p. 613, 80 Cal.Rptr.3d 98, 187 P.3d 946.)

The basis for a peremptory challenge "may range from the virtually certain to the highly speculative [citation]." (

[245 Cal.App.4th 1158]