Opinion ID: 711728
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Denial of Funds

Text: 3 A denial of funds for expert services will not be reversed on appeal unless the appellant establishes by clear and convincing evidence that prejudice occurred on account of the judge's failure to authorize the requested funds. United States v. Sanders, 459 F.2d 1001, 1002 (9th Cir.1972). 4 De La Mora appeals the district court's denial of his request, under the Criminal Justice Act, 18 U.S.C. 3006A(e), for funds to conduct an empirical study to determine whether non-voters are a cognizable group for purposes of showing that the composition of the grand jury was unconstitutional. 5 Courts have rejected contentions by defendants that non-voters, per se, are a cognizable group for purposes of the Duren 1 test. Camp v. United States, 413 F.2d 419, 421 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 369 U.S. 968 (1969); United States v. Afflerbach, 754 F.2d 866, 870 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1029 (1985). In United States v. Suttiswad, 696 F.2d 645, 649 (9th Cir.1982), we refused to recognize all non-whites as a separate cognizable group. Further, courts have already acknowledged that Hispanics and other ethnic groups were cognizable groups. Therefore, we affirm the district court's denial of funds for De La Mora's empirical study.