United States v. Wendell Pichay

Ninth Circuit

United States v. Wendell Pichay

986 F.2d 1259, 93 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1384, 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 3082, 1993 WL 49673

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided February 26, 1993·No. 91-10571·Published·Cited by 14 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Appellant argues that the prosecutor violated his right to equal protection, as secured under Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986), by using its peremptory challenges to systematically strike young persons from the jury solely on account of their age.

Neither the Supreme Court nor any circuit has held that the Equal Protection Clause prohibits the government from striking venirepersons on account of youth. Accordingly, we now join the First Circuit and the Seventh Circuit in holding that young adults do not constitute a cognizable group for purposes of an equal protection challenge to the composition of a petit jury. See United States v. Cresta, 825 F.2d 538, 545 (1st Cir.1987), cert. denied, 486 U.S. 1042, 108 S.Ct. 2033, 100 L.Ed.2d 618 (1988); United States v. Jackson, 983 F.2d 757, 762-63 (7th Cir.1993).

In an unpublished memorandum filed contemporaneously with this opinion, we AFFIRM appellant’s convictions for murder, robbery, and conspiracy to commit robbery.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

Appellant argues that the prosecutor violated his right to equal protection, as secured under Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986), by using its peremptory challenges to systematically strike young persons from the jury solely on account of their age.

Neither the Supreme Court nor any circuit has held that the Equal Protection Clause prohibits the government from striking venirepersons on account of youth. Accordingly, we now join the First Circuit and the Seventh Circuit in holding that young adults do not constitute a cognizable group for purposes of an equal protection challenge to the composition of a petit jury. See United States v. Cresta, 825 F.2d 538, 545 (1st Cir.1987), cert. denied, 486 U.S. 1042, 108 S.Ct. 2033, 100 L.Ed.2d 618 (1988); United States v. Jackson, 983 F.2d 757, 762-63 (7th Cir.1993).

In an unpublished memorandum filed contemporaneously with this opinion, we AFFIRM appellant’s convictions for murder, robbery, and conspiracy to commit robbery.

United States v. Wendell Pichay, 986 F.2d 1259, 93 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1384, 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 3082, 1993 WL 49673 (9th Cir. 1993).

Pincite

986 F.2d 1259 (United States v. Wendell Pichay) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related