Event Details
Date Unknown
Description
Initial trial of the defendant in the Bahna case for various narcotics crimes.
Participants (1)
| Name | Type | Mentions | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bahna | person | 4 | View Entity |
Source Documents (1)
DOJ-OGR-00002831.jpg
This document, a page from a legal filing, discusses the legal precedent for dividing a judicial district for the purpose of jury selection. It centers on the Second Circuit's decision in United States v. Bahna, where a defendant's second trial was moved to a different courthouse that drew jurors from a smaller, less diverse geographic pool than the entire district. The Second Circuit upheld this practice, ruling that the fairness of a jury pool should be evaluated based on the specific division from which it is drawn, not the district as a whole, especially when the division is based on administrative feasibility.
Related Events
Events with shared participants
Second trial of the defendant in the Bahna case, which was granted after the initial trial.
Date unknown • Eastern District’s Uniondale courthouse
The defendant in the Bahna case raised a fair cross-section challenge following his second conviction, arguing the jury pool was unrepresentative.
Date unknown • Eastern District of New York
The Second Circuit rejected the defendant's reasoning in the Bahna case and upheld the conviction.
1995-01-01
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein event