Document Type
Article
Publication Date
5-23-1986
Abstract
Drawn from hamlet and metropolis alike, jurors daily give life to the ancient right, enshrined in the Magna Carta and the Constitution, to a trial by jury of one's peers. Although now summoned by statute instead of the medieval sheriff's writ of venire facias, a representative jury array remains the expression of the community's role in securing this fundamental right. Accordingly, both the sixth and fourteenth amendments mandate that prospective jurors be chosen free of the taint of racial discrimination.
It is the interplay of these two provisions that is now before us. The State of Connecticut appeals from judgments of the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut, granting Alston's and Haskins's petitions for writs of habeas corpus. Using modern statistical data, the district court ruled that the jury selection system employed in 1975 in Connecticut state court, where the petitioners were tried, violated the equal protection clause. Agreeing with Chief Judge Daly's analysis, we affirm.
Recommended Citation
Miner '56, Roger J., "Alston v. Manson, 791 F. 2d 255 - Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit 1986" (1986). Circuit Court Opinions. 109.
https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/circuit_opinions/109
Comments
791 F.2d 255 (1986) Michael ALSTON, Petitioner-Appellee, v. John R. MANSON, Commissioner, Connecticut Department of Correction, Respondent-Appellant. James HASKINS, Petitioner-Appellee,
v.
John R. MANSON, Commissioner, Connecticut Department of Correction, Respondent-Appellant.
Nos. 942, 943, Docket 85-2358, 85-2361.
United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
Argued March 20, 1986.
Decided May 23, 1986.
New York Law School location: File #131, Box #31