DOJ-OGR-00002328.jpg
700 KB
Extraction Summary
4
People
2
Organizations
2
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
700 KB
Summary
This document is page 8 of a legal filing from January 25, 2021, in the case of Ms. Maxwell. The text argues that the jury selection process in White Plains systematically underrepresented Black and Hispanic individuals, thereby violating Ms. Maxwell's Sixth Amendment right to a fair cross-section. The argument relies on the three-part test established by the Supreme Court in Duren v. Missouri to demonstrate a prima facie violation.
People (4)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Ms. Maxwell | Defendant/Subject of the legal argument |
Mentioned in the context of her Sixth Amendment right being violated due to the jury selection process.
|
| Duren | Party in a legal case |
Mentioned as the namesake of the legal precedent Duren v. Missouri.
|
| Jackman | Party in a legal case |
Mentioned as a party in the legal precedent United States v. Jackman.
|
| Rioux | Party in a legal case |
Mentioned as a party in the legal precedent United States v. Rioux.
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Supreme Court | Government agency |
Cited as having set forth the three elements for a prima facie violation in Duren v. Missouri.
|
| United States | Government agency |
Mentioned as a party in the legal cases United States v. Jackman and United States v. Rioux.
|
Timeline (2 events)
2021-01-25
Document 126 in case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN was filed.
A jury selection process in White Plains is described as resulting in the systematic underrepresentation of Black and Hispanic persons, allegedly violating Ms. Maxwell's rights.
White Plains
Locations (2)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Mentioned as the location where the jury was selected, which allegedly resulted in systematic underrepresentation.
|
|
|
Mentioned in the case name Duren v. Missouri.
|
Relationships (1)
This document is part of a legal case (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) where Ms. Maxwell's rights are being argued against the backdrop of government (court) actions, specifically the jury selection process. The government is mentioned as bearing the burden of proof if a prima facie case is made.
Key Quotes (3)
"distinctive"Source
— Legal precedent (Duren v. Missouri)
(Used to describe a group in the community as part of the first element of a fair cross-section claim.)
DOJ-OGR-00002328.jpg
Quote #1
"significant[ly] underrepresent[ed]"Source
— The Court (as cited in the document)
(Part of the determination for the second element of a fair cross-section claim, regarding whether distinctive groups are underrepresented in the jury selection process.)
DOJ-OGR-00002328.jpg
Quote #2
"the district or division where the trial is to be held."Source
— Legal understanding (as cited in the document)
(The widely understood definition of 'community' for a fair cross-section analysis, which was not explicitly defined in the Duren case.)
DOJ-OGR-00002328.jpg
Quote #3
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document