Skip to content
Case File
d-8541Court UnsealedLegal Filing

court filing: Case 1:17-cr-00365-DLC Document 1859 Filed 03/24/21 Page 20 of 20

Date
Unknown
Source
Court Unsealed
Reference
File: case 1:17-cr-00365-dlc document 1859 filed 03/24/21 page 20 of 20
Pages
1
Persons
4

Summary

The document discusses the court's decision on defining the relevant jury pool and community for Schulte's trial, agreeing with the Government that the northern counties from which White Plains draws jurors represent the relevant community.

This document is from the epstein-docs Archive.

View Source Collection
Browse epstein-docs ArchiveFile: case 1:17-cr-00365-dlc document 1859 filed 03/24/21 page 20 of 20
Share
PostReddit

Related Documents (6)

Court UnsealedLegal FilingUnknown

court filing: Case:20-cj-017-00 Document#:1859 Filed:03/22/21

The court is analyzing the defendant's fair cross-section challenge and must determine the relevant jury venire. The defendant argues that the White Plains qualified wheel is the relevant jury venire, while the government contends that the White Plains master wheel is the correct jury venire. The court agrees with the government.

1p
Court UnsealedLegal FilingUnknown

court filing: Case 1:17-cr-00383-PAC Document 1859 Filed 03/22/21 Page 18 of 20

The court rejects Schulte's Equal Protection claim and JSSA claims, finding no evidence of intentional discrimination and no substantial failure to comply with the JSSA. The court also dismisses Schulte's Sixth Amendment fair cross-section challenge.

1p
Court UnsealedLegal FilingUnknown

court filing: Case 1:17-cr-00533-JAE Document 1359 Filed 03/23/21 Page 19 of 20

The court rejects Schulte's allegations that the Government's decision to seek an indictment in White Plains and errors in the jury selection process violated the Jury Selection and Service Act (JSSA). The court agrees with Judge Roman's reasoning in a related case and finds that any alleged errors were technical or minimal.

1p
Court UnsealedLegal FilingUnknown

court filing: Case 1:20-cv-06539-JPC Document 185-1 Filed 03/22/21 Page 17 of 20

The document discusses Schulte's challenge to the jury selection process, arguing that it violates the Sixth Amendment and the Equal Protection clause due to underrepresentation of African Americans and Hispanic Americans. The court rejects these claims, citing the lack of proof of discriminatory intent and failure to establish a prima facie violation. The court relies on precedents such as Rioux and Castaneda in its decision.

1p
Court UnsealedLegal FilingUnknown

court filing: Case 2:17-cr-00365-JMA Document 1859 Filed 03/22/21 Page 11 of 20

The court rejects Schulte's contention that the relevant community for his fair cross-section challenge is the Manhattan counties or the entire District, instead concluding that the White Plains counties are the relevant community. The court also finds that the government's decision to seek the indictment from White Plains was proper. The ruling is based on the precedent set in United States v. Bahna.

1p
Court UnsealedLegal FilingUnknown

court filing: Case 2:17-cr-00383-JS Document 1859 Filed 03/22/21 Page 14 of 20

The court analyzes jury underrepresentation using the absolute disparity method and finds that the disparities in the representation of African Americans and Hispanic Americans in the White Plains master wheel are within the tolerated limits established by Second Circuit precedents.

1p

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.