Opinion ID: 1375029
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Denying Motion Challenging Jury-selection Process

Text: Defendant was tried in the Southeast Judicial District (Norwalk) of the Los Angeles County Superior Court. He implicitly moved to challenge the jury-selection process on the basis that jurors would not be drawn from a representative cross-section of the community. The court implicitly denied the motion. The parties stipulated that the challenge to the jury-selection process that we rejected in People v. Mattson (1990) 50 Cal.3d 826, 842-844 [268 Cal. Rptr. 802, 789 P.2d 983] was raised on the same record as exists in this case. Mattson was also tried in the Norwalk district. Defendant argues that we should reconsider our holding in Mattson, in which we held that because the record does not demonstrate a disparity when the population of this community is used for comparison purposes, defendant has not established a prima facie violation of the cross-section guaranty of the state and federal Constitutions. ( Id. at p. 844.) We decline to reconsider our conclusion.