Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
d-8658Court UnsealedLegal Filing

court filing or legal brief: Case 2:17-cr-00354-JAK Document 1859 Filed 03/22/21 Page 10 of 20

The document analyzes the District's Jury Plan and its territorial division, referencing United States v. Gottfried and United States v. Bahna. It discusses the rationale behind dividing jury pools territorially and the implications for fair cross-section challenges. The Second Circuit's decision in Bahna is highlighted as framing the inquiry into whether a jury venire drawn from a properly designated division satisfies fair cross-section requirements.

Date
Unknown
Source
Court Unsealed
Reference
File: case 2:17-cr-00354-jak document 1859 filed 03/22/21 page 10 of 20
Pages
1
Persons
0
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

The document analyzes the District's Jury Plan and its territorial division, referencing United States v. Gottfried and United States v. Bahna. It discusses the rationale behind dividing jury pools territorially and the implications for fair cross-section challenges. The Second Circuit's decision in Bahna is highlighted as framing the inquiry into whether a jury venire drawn from a properly designated division satisfies fair cross-section requirements.

This document is from the epstein-docs Archive.

View Source Collection
Browse epstein-docs ArchiveFile: case 2:17-cr-00354-jak document 1859 filed 03/22/21 page 10 of 20
0Share
PostReddit

Forum Discussions

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

Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.