211026P.pdf   04/21/2022  United States  v.  Robert Hill
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  21-1026
   U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis   
   [PUBLISHED] [Gruender, Author, with Loken and Grasz, Circuit Judges] 
   Criminal Case - Conviction. Despite a concession that Hill did not present 
   a prima facie case of discrimination to support his Batson claim, the 
   district court nonetheless rejected the claim on the merits at step three 
   of the analysis. We reject the government's argument that no further 
   review is necessary once defendant concedes no prima facie case was 
   presented. Raised for the first time on appeal, Hill argues that the 
   government failed to strike similarly situated venirepersons. We need not 
   decide the standard of review -- plain error or no review -- because 
   Hill's arguments fail under either standard. In short, we need not decide 
   whether the government's proffer of a race-neutral explanation and the 
   district court's subsequent ruling mooted Hill's failure to present a 
   prima facie case or whether similarly-situated Batson arguments raised for 
   the first time on appeal are subject to plain error or no review, as 
   Hill's arguments fail. The district court did not abuse its discretion in 
   admitting expert testimony, as any admission was harmless. The expert 
   testimony related to translating drug code and slang, that Hill contended 
   concerned language that was straightforward and accessible to lay jurors 
   and endorsed the government's conspiracy charge. Such testimony was merely 
   cumulative. The evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for 
   possessing a firearm as a convicted felon. Judge Loken concurs.