Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

DONALD SCHANBARGER, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. ROBERT MACY, JR., DEFENDANT, HUDSON FALLS; PAUL J. BROWN; ANDREW S. CONLEY; MARJORIE CLARK; CLARISSE MONDOUX, DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES.

PER CURIAM:

Donald Schanbarger claims that his jury trial was invalid because his jury was selected based on a venire drawn from voter registration lists. For the reasons stated in United States v. Biaggi, 909 F.2d 662, 676-78 (2d) Cir. 1990), cert. denied, 499 U.S. 904, 111 S.Ct. 1102, and Bershatsky v. Levin, No. CV-95-4121, slip op. at 4-5 (E.D.N.Y. Jan. 30, 1996) (Trager, J.), we hold that, absent positive evidence that some groups have been hindered in attempting to register to vote, a jury venire drawn from voter registration lists violates neither the Sixth Amendment's fair cross-section requirement nor the Fifth Amendment's guarantee of Equal Protection. See also United States v. Ashley, 54 F.3d 311, 314-15 (7th Cir. 1995), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 116 S.Ct. 232, 133 L.Ed.2d 161 (1995); United States v. Cecil, 836 F.2d 1431, 1448 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 487 U.S. 1205, 108 S.Ct. 2846, 101 L.Ed.2d 883 (1988). No such evidence was offered.

We have reviewed appellant's other claims and find them to be without merit. We therefore affirm.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

SCHANBARGER v. MACY
(Mar 8, 1996)