Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
United States v. Wendell Pichay
986 F.2d 1259
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
- Date
- 1993-02-26
- Topic
- intellectual-property-and-technology
How later courts describe this case
- youth; following United States v. Crespa, 825 F.2d 538, 545 (1st Cir. 1987) and United States v. Jackson, 983 F.2d 757, 762-63 (7th Cir. 1993)
- “[Y]oung adults do not constitute a cognizable group for purposes of an equal protection challenge to the composition of a petit jury.”
- “[n] either the [United States] Supreme Court nor any [C]ircuit [Court of Appeals] has held that the Equal Protection Clause prohibits the government from striking venirepersons on account of youth”
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed United States v. Wendell Pichay. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 13 opinions
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In an unpublished memorandum filed contemporaneously with this opinion, we AFFIRM appellant’s convictions for murder, robbery, and conspiracy to commit robbery.