NCJ Number
31865
Journal
Mississippi Law Journal Volume: 47 Issue: 1 Dated: (JANUARY 1976) Pages: 1-30
Date Published
1976
Length
30 pages
Annotation
THIS ARTICLE ARGUES THAT THE SYSTEMATIC EXCLUSION OF 18, 19, AND 20-YEAR-OLDS IN THE MISSISSIPPI JURY SELECTION SCHEME AMOUNTS TO PURPOSEFUL EXCLUSION OF A SOCIALLY DISTINCT GROUP, AND IS THEREFORE UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
Abstract
THE CONSTITUTIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR JURY SELECTION, AND IN PARTICULAR, THE SUBSTANTIAL CROSS SECTION RULE ARE FIRST EXAMINED. THE AUTHOR THEN EXPLORES THE ISSUE OF YOUTH AS A JUDICALLY COGNIZABLE CLASS, SINCE IN ORDER TO MAKE OUT A PRIMA FACIE CASE OF DISCRIMINATION IN THE COMPOSITION OF GRAND AND PETIT JURY VENIRES, A DEFENDANT HAS THE BURDEN OF SHOWING (1) SYSTEMATIC EXCLUSION OF (2) A COGNIZABLE CLASS, OR DISTINCT GROUP, WITHIN THE POPULATION. THE AUTHOR CITES NUMEROUS STUDIES AND POLLS WHICH INDICATE SUBSTANTIAL ATTITUDE AND VALUE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN YOUTHS AND OLDER ADULTS IN SUPPORT OF HIS CONTENTION THAT YOUTHS CONSTITUTE SUCH A CLASS. ALSO EXAMINED IS THE ISSUE OF WHETHER YOUNG PEOPLE AGED 18 TO 21 ARE A SUFFICIENTLY DISTENCT AGE SUBGROUP (COMPARED TO THE 18 TO 30 YEAR OLD GROUP) TO WARRANT LEGAL COGNIZABILITY. THE AUTHOR CONTENDS THAT EVEN IF THE MISSISSIPPI COURT IS WILLING TO HOLD THE 18 TO 21 YEAR OLD GROUP COGNIZABLE, THIS GROUP SHOULD BE INCLUDED, SINCE ITS EXCLUSION CAUSESTHE LARGER, LEGALLY COGNIZABLE 18 TO 30 YEAR OLD GROUP TO BE SUBSTANTIALLY UNDERREPRESENTED. THE PREMISE OF THIS ALTERNATIVE CHALLENGE IS THAT THE 18 TO 30 YEAR OLD GROUP IS INDEED LEGALLY COGNIZABLE. THE AUTHOR CONCLUDES THAT THE 18 TO 21 YEAR OLD GROUP SHOULD BE INCLUDED, AND STATES ITS INCLUSION WILL PROTECT DEFENDANT'S RIGHTS, BENEFIT THE PUBLIC, AND HELP INTEGRATE THESE YOUNG ADULTS INTO 'THE