Summary
upholding use of voter registration lists as source of names for civil jury venire
Summary of this case from Bershatsky v. LevinOpinion
No. 1026, Docket No. 95-7810.
Submitted March 1, 1996.
Decided March 8, 1996.
Donald Schanbarger, pro se, Salem, New York, for Appellant.
Veronica Carrozza O'Dell, Fitzgerald, Morris Baker Firth, Glens Falls, New York, for Appellees Hudson Falls, Paul J. Brown and Andrew S. Conley.
Jeff Culkin, Bouck, Holloway, Kiernan Casey, Albany, New York, for Appellee Marjorie Clark.
Mark E. Cerasano, Bartlett, Pontiff, Stewart Rhodes, Glens Falls, New York, for Appellee Clarisse Mondoux.
Appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York (Munson, Judge) rendered after a jury trial. Appellant contends, inter alia, that his jury trial was invalid because the jury was selected based on a venire drawn from voter registration lists.
Affirmed
Before: VAN GRAAFEILAND, MESKILL, and WINTER, Circuit Judges.
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.