Test v. United States 8212 5993
Decision Date | 27 January 1975 |
Docket Number | No. 73,73 |
Citation | 420 U.S. 28,42 L.Ed.2d 786,95 S.Ct. 749 |
Parties | John E. TEST, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES. —5993 |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Walter L. Gerash, Denver, Colo., for petitioner.
William L. Patton, Boston, Mass., for respondent.
Petitioner was convicted under 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) for distribution of a hallucinogenic drug commonly known as LSD. Prior to trial he filed a motion to dismiss his indictment claiming that the master lists1 from which his grand jury had been, and petit jury would be, selected systematically excluded disproportionate numbers of people with Spanish surnames, students, and balcks. These exclusions, petitioner alleged, violated both his Sixth Amendment right to an impartial jury and the provisions of the Jury Selection and Service Act of 1968, 28 U.S.C. § 1861 et seq. Attached to this motion was an affidavit by petitioner's counsel stating facts that had been disclosed by testimony at a jury challenge in another case, and which petitioner claimed supported his challenge. Also accompanying the motion was another motion requesting permission to inspect and copy the jury lists 'pertaining to the grand and petit juries in the instant indictment.' Petitioner asserted that inspection was necessary for discovering evidence to buttress his claims.
The District Court rejected the jury challenge and denied the motion to inspect the lists. Petitioner renewed his claims before the Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit but that court affirmed his conviction without discussing these issues. We granted certiorari to decide whether the Jury Selection and Service Act required that petitioner be permitted to inspect the jury lists. 417 U.S. 967, 95 S.Ct. 3170, 41 L.Ed.2d 1138.
In its brief and oral argument before this Court, the United States has agreed that petitioner was erroneously denied access to the lists and urges us to remand the case. We also agree with petitioner.2 Section 1867(f) of the Act, in relevant part, provides:
(Emphasis supplied.)
This provision makes clear that a litigant3 has essentially an unqualified right to inspect jury lists.4 It grants access in order to aid parties in the 'preparation' of motions challenging jury-selection procedures. Indeed, without inspection, a party almost invariably would be unable to determine whether he has a potentially meritorious jury...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Gause v. U.S.
...by analogy to the appeals presently before us. The leading authority construing the federal statute is Test v. United States, 420 U.S. 28, 95 S.Ct. 749, 42 L.Ed.2d 786 (1975) (per curiam). John E. Test, who had been charged with distribution of LSD, filed a Jury Motion in which he claimed t......
-
Runyon v. United States
...determine whether the jury selection process complied with statutory and constitutional law. See Test v. United States , 420 U.S. 28, 29–30, 95 S.Ct. 749, 42 L.Ed.2d 786 (1975) (per curiam). The ability to inspect such lists does not require meeting any burden or standard of proof. Here, tr......
-
U.S. v. McLernon
...that 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1867(f) (Supp.1984), grants a defendant an "unqualified right to inspect jury lists." Test v. United States, 420 U.S. 28, 95 S.Ct. 749, 42 L.Ed.2d 786 (1975). That section The contents of records or papers used by the jury commission or clerk in connection with the jury ......
-
United States v. Gruberg, 79 Crim. 447 (WCC).
...see Deardorff at 1043, § 1867(f) gives defendant an unconditional right to inspect the relevant documents, Test v. United States, 420 U.S. 28, 95 S.Ct. 749, 42 L.Ed.2d 786 (1975) ("Test I); Govt. of Canal Zone v. Davis, 592 F.2d 887, 889 (5th Cir. 1979) (denial of motion to inspect under § ......
-
U.s. Supreme Court Decisions: 1974-1975
...or all of them prospective only." c. Right to Inspect Jury Lists Under the Jury Selection and Service Act. Test v. United States, 420 U.S. 28, 95 S.Ct. 749, 42 L.Ed.2d 786 (1975): Petitioner was convicted under 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (distribution of LSD). The trial court denied his motion t......
-
Trials
...by the jury commission when such records are not published or otherwise available. See 28 U.S.C. § 1867(d), (f); see also Test v. U.S., 420 U.S. 28, 29-30 (1975) (per curiam) (defendant has “essentially an unqualified right to inspect jury lists”); see, e.g. , U.S. v. Orlando-Figueroa, 229......
-
Jury Selection in the Age of COVID-19. Peeking inside a black box of potential constitutional concerns.
...an unqualified right to request the “records or papers” used in the jury selection process. 28 U.S.C. § 1867(f); Test v. United States , 420 U.S. 28, 30 (1975) (an “unqualified right to inspection is required not only by the plain text of the statute, but also by the statute’s overall purpo......