Legal Opinion

Young v. United States

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided May 22, 1997No. 94-CF-1568PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

STEADMAN, Associate Judge:

Appellant Reginald Young contends that his Sixth Amendment right to an impartial jury was violated when a jury member failed to disclose that he was a convicted felon on life parole and that the prosecutor in Young’s case was also prosecuting the juror’s son in another case. After a post-trial hearing, the trial court found no actual juror bias. We see no basis to fault this determinative ruling and accordingly affirm. 1

I

On May 10, 1994, a jury found Young guilty of distribution and possession with intent to distribute cocaine. The jury also found Young’s…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Smith v. PhillipsSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  2. McDonough Power Equipment, Inc. v. GreenwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  3. Kwong Hai Chew v. ColdingSupreme Court of the United States · 1953
  4. Lutwak v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1953
  5. United States v. Oliver L. NorthCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1990

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Proudfoot v. Dan's Marine Service, Inc.West Virginia Supreme Court · 2002
  2. Sams v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1998
  3. Graham v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1997
  4. Kittle v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2013
  5. Johnson v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2002

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API