Opinion ID: 1254804
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 10

Heading: A distinctive group.

Text: The first prong of the Duren test was met in this case, as the Attorney General concedes. Two showings have been suggested before an asserted group will be deemed to be a distinctive or cognizable group in the community. The members of the group must share a common perspective arising from their life experience in the group, i.e. a perspective gained precisely because they are members of that group. ( Rubio v. Superior Court (1979) 24 Cal.3d 93, 98 [154 Cal. Rptr. 734, 593 P.2d 595] (lead opn.).) In addition, the party asserting the claim may have to show that no other members of the community are capable of adequately representing the perspective of the group assertedly excluded. This is so because the goal of the cross-section rule is to enhance the likelihood that the jury will be representative of significant community attitudes, not of groups per se. ( Ibid. ) [5] (4) Both Blacks and Hispanics share with other members of their groups a common perspective arising from their respective experiences as a group, and no other members of the community are capable of adequately representing their perspectives. Thus, Blacks and Hispanics are cognizable groups for purposes of fair cross-section analysis. (See, e.g., Castaneda v. Partida, supra, 430 U.S. 482, 495 [51 L.Ed.2d 498, 511]; Hovey v. Superior Court (1980) 28 Cal.3d 1, 20, fn. 45 [168 Cal. Rptr. 128, 616 P.2d 1301].)