Court Opinion

ID: 9757017
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-28 22:14:45.604257+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:28:34.244413
License: Public Domain

MANDERINO, Justice
(dissenting).
I dissent. The majority states that, even though blacks register to vote in a proportion smaller than the proportion of blacks in the general population, the defendant was not denied his right to an impartial jury because (1) “a group of persons who have failed to register to vote has never been considered to constitute a ‘cognizable group’ ” and (2) the nonregistration was voluntary in the sense that no one had affirmatively barred their registration. This defies logic! If blacks (and probably other minorities and young people) are less likely to register to vote, then any jury pool that uses voter registration lists as a source of jurors cannot possibly represent a cross section of the community and whether the nonregistration is voluntary or coerced is irrelevant. The end result is still an unrepresentative jury pool. This is particularly true when one considers other *482sources of prospective jurors which are readily available on computers such as social security, census and other lists.
I would hold, that the use of only voter registration lists for selecting prospective jurors is a violation of the defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to a trial by an impartial jury unless the prosecution can show that in a particular community voter registration lists reflect the general make up of that community.