racial considerations. IV. DISCUSSION We begin our analysis with the undisputed fact that the prosecutor admitted to the trial judge that race was a factor that he considered in exercising the State’s peremptory challenges. Wallace urges that this admission, by itself, establishes a Batson violation. The Second Circuit has rejected substantially the same contention. Howard, 986 F.2d at 26-28. Like the district court, we are persuaded by the Second Circuit’s thorough and well-reasoned analysis of the issue. As the Second Circuit explained, “the acknowledgment that race was part of the prosecutor’s motivation, or even a finding to that effect unaided by acknowledgment, is not inconsistent with the existence of some other race-neutral explanation for the prosecutor’s action. h Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>). We have reviewed the record and cannot say
holding that clearly erroneous standard of review governs review of trial judges findings on batson claims because they turn largely on credibility recognizing that factual findings were clearly erroneous where the record before the court was simply devoid of any basis for the district courts conclusion holding that this court will only set aside district courts factual findings when they are clearly erroneous holding that clearly erroneous standard of review governs district courts factual findings based on state record documentary evidence and inferences from other facts holding that the clearly erroneous standard of review applies unless judgment is entered on the basis of documentary evidence alone