Lawyers Questioning Jury Fairness During Covid Want Additional Information About Racial Balance

By Jeff Levine - October 13, 2023
Court | Daily Stories |

Lawyers for the DC Public Defenders Service (PDS) told DC Superior Court Judge Marisa Demeo on Oct. 13 they still need more information about the jury selection process. They want to determine if 84 cases tried during Covid weren’t decided by racially balanced juries.  If not, the defendants’ right to a trial by a jury of their peers may have been violated. 

The litigation pits the PDS against the DC Superior Court, which empanels the juries, and the US Attorney’s Office which tries the cases. If their argument succeeds it could open the door to retrying dozens of felony cases that might be invalidated on constitutional grounds.

Jason Tulley, the lead Public Defender, filed a motion in 2022, “to grant discovery of information relating to the selection of jurors during the COVID-19 pandemic to ensure that…jurors have been selected from a fair cross-section of the D.C. community.” Specifically, were there enough black people in proportion to the DC population?

Since then Judge Demeo issued an order allowing the PDS Office to receive the Superior Court’s master list but with personal identifiable information redacted to protect the confidentiality of those named. 

However, Tulley is asking for more, especially data related to the ages of those on the list as well as information about why a 2022 list hasn’t been updated.  

“Much of this is unwarranted and unnecessary,” said Richard Sobiecki, representing the DC Superior Court. He noted that PDS had already made 15 requests for voting records.  

“There’s a giant discrepancy in the lists,” said Tulley.  

The lead US Attorney sided with Sobiecki and the DC courts saying the litigation has “gone on for years. This process needs to reach an end.”

“The wheels of justice haven’t ground to a halt,” said Tulley in justifying his requests for additional material. 

Sobiecki said PDS is not entitled to a “100 percent understanding of the process (jury selection.)”  “They have everything they need.” 

Judge Demeo wanted to know if the additional information was related to racial issues or simply a fault in the system.  “Did that have a racial impact,” and if so what was it?  She also said it appeared the case is not just about what happened during the pandemic but whether jury panels generally have sufficient black representation.  

If the information would advance discovery, she said it’s worth pursuing, also indicating she’d like to wrap up that process by the end of the year.  

Sobiecki has 30 days to respond to the new information requests.  Meanwhile, the parties in the case are expected to introduce expert testimony which could push the proceedings well into 2024.

The next hearing in the case is scheduled for Dec. 15.