Skip to content
Case File
d-8685Court UnsealedLegal Filing

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

Date
Unknown
Source
Court Unsealed
Reference
File: case:20-cj-017-00 document#:1859 filed:03/22/21
Pages
1
Persons
5

Summary

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.

This document is from the epstein-docs Archive.

View Source Collection
Browse epstein-docs ArchiveFile: case:20-cj-017-00 document#:1859 filed:03/22/21
Share
PostReddit

Related Documents (6)

Court UnsealedLegal FilingUnknown

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

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.

1p
Court UnsealedLegal FilingUnknown

court filing: Case 4:20-cr-00354-PAE Document 1359 Filed 03/22/21 Page 16 of 20

The court rejects Schulte's claims that the Jury Plan violates the Sixth Amendment due to systematic exclusion, citing various reasons including the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and the use of voter registration lists. The court relies on precedent, such as Rioux and Schanbarger, to support its conclusions. The defendant's allegations regarding the Jury Plan's replenishment period and exclusion of 'inactive voters' are also dismissed.

1p
Court UnsealedLegal FilingUnknown

Court Opinion & Order: 17-Cr-548

The defendant, Joshua Adam Schulte, a former CIA employee, moves to dismiss the third superseding indictment on the grounds that the grand jury venire did not reflect a fair cross-section of the community. The court denies the motion, rejecting Schulte's claims under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments and the Jury Selection and Service Act of 1968. The case involves charges related to stealing national defense information and transmitting it to Wikileaks.

1p
Court UnsealedLegal FilingUnknown

court filing: 20-cr-17-00388

The document discusses Schulte's motion to dismiss the indictment on the grounds that it was obtained in violation of his constitutional rights and the JSSA, due to issues with the jury selection process in the White Plains courthouse. The court provides background on the District's jury selection plan and the defendant's claims. The motion is based on alleged underrepresentation of African American and Hispanic American populations in the grand jury venire.

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

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