1. Whether a state court improperly expands or modifies the standard this Court established in Batson v. Kentucky and its progeny, when it requires a defendant to establish that a juror who was removed peremptorily by the prosecution is strikingly similar to an accepted juror, rather than merely having to show that they are similarly situated, as this Court held in Miller-El v. Dretke.

2. As part of the third step of the mandated Batson analysis of a prosecutor's purported race-based peremptory challenge, does Batson v. Kentucky and its progeny require state courts to conduct a comparative juror analysis.

Whether a state court improperly expands or modifies the Batson standard by requiring a defendant to establish that a juror removed peremptorily is strikingly similar to an accepted juror, rather than merely similarly situated