Opinion ID: 154604
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Jury Selection Process

Text: 48 Mr. Aguirre contends the district court's jury selection process violated his rights under the Jury Selection and Service Act as well as his Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights. 12 49 28 U.S.C. § 1867(d) requires all motions challenging compliance with the Jury Selection and Service Act to be accompanied by a sworn statement of facts which, if true, would constitute a substantial failure to comply with the [Jury Selection and Service Act]. In the recent appeal of Mr. Aguirre's co-defendant and daughter, Doloras Contreras, we determined Ms. Contreras' claim under the Jury Selection and Service Act was barred by the defendants' failure to accompany their motions challenging the district court's jury selection procedures with an adequate sworn statement as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1867(d). United States v. Contreras, 108 F.3d 1255 (10th Cir. 1997). Here, as in Contreras, Mr. Aguirre failed to file a sworn affidavit in support of his motions challenging the district court's jury selection procedures. Consequently, Mr. Aguirre's Jury Selection and Service Act claim is precluded. 50 Also in Contreras, we denied Ms. Contreras' Fifth and Sixth Amendment challenges to the district court's jury selection procedures. See id. at 1268-70. Specifically, we determined Ms. Contreras could not establish a prima facie case of a fair cross section violation or an equal protection violation, and we concluded Ms. Contreras' Sixth Amendment impartial jury claim was without merit. Id. For the reasons stated in Contreras, we likewise find no merit in Mr. Aguirre's constitutional challenges to the jury selection procedures. 13