Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Sampson

United States District Court, D. Massachusetts

May 13, 2016

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
GARY LEE SAMPSON Criminal Action

ORDER ON JURY MOTIONS; MOTION CONCERNING THE INTERROGATION ON AUGUST 1, 2001; MOTION TO PRECLUDE DEATH AS A POSSIBLE PUNISHMENT; AND MOTION TO CHANGE VENUE

Leo T. Sorokin. United States District Judge

The defendant Gary Lee Sampson pled guilty to two counts of carjacking resulting in death and was sentenced to death in 2004. In 2011, the Court (Wolf, J.) vacated the death sentence in light of juror misconduct, and the First Circuit affirmed, ruling that Sampson is entitled to a resentencing hearing pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Sampson v. United States, 724 F.3d 150, 170 (1st Cir. 2013). The case was reassigned to this session of the Court on January 6, 2016. At that point, a number of motions were pending, see Doc. No. 2137, and the parties have filed additional motions since. This Order resolves the following motions filed by Sampson: (1)

Motion for Disclosure of Jury Records (Doc. No. 2031-1); (2) Motion to Dismiss the Indictment and/or Jury Venire and Stay Proceedings Pending Reconstituting the Jury Wheel to Conform with Statutory and Constitutional Requirements (Doc. No. 2030-1); (3) Motion in Limine Concerning Sampson’s Interrogation on August 1, 2001 (Doc. No. 1899-1); (4) Motion to Preclude Death as a Possible Punishment in Light of the Fact that Sampson Is Terminally Ill. (Doc. No. 2175); and (5) Renewed Motion for Change of Venue (Doc. No. 2184).

I. Discussion

A. Motion for Disclosure of Jury Records (Motion for Disclosure)

Sampson seeks a variety of this judicial district’s jury records pertaining to “the selection process of the grand and petit juries during calendar years 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2014.” Doc.No. 2031-1 at 1. He also seeks jury records pertaining to his resentencing trial when they become available. Id. Sampson contends that he needs this information to challenge this district’s jury wheel as unconstitutional and in violation of federal law. The government does not oppose this motion. Doc. No. 2040 at 4 n.2.

In light of Test v. United States, 420 U.S. 28, 30 (1975), the Motion for Disclosure (Doc.No. 2031-1) is ALLOWED IN PART. The Clerk of the Court is ordered to provide the following information to Sampson:

a. JS-12 forms and AO-12 forms completed for the calendar years 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2014 Master and Supplemental Jury Wheels during the life of the wheels.
b. Other statistical analyses of the calendar years 2012, 2013, and 2014 Master and Supplemental Jury Wheels.[1]
c. Blank juror summons/qualification form that will be used to summon the petit jurors for this case.
d. Calendar years 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2014 Master Jury Wheel data (in electronic and accessible form, including a layout with descriptions of all data fields and codes). The data should not include any personally identifiable information, such as name and street address, but should include participant number, zip code, county, municipality, and date of birth, to the extent available.
e. Calendar years 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2014 Supplemental Jury Wheel data (in electronic and accessible form, including a layout with descriptions of all data fields and codes). The data should not include any personally identifiable information, such as name and street address, but should include participant number, zip code, county, municipality, and date of birth, to the extent available.
f. Results of the national change-of-address comparison for calendar years 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2014.
g. All draws from the calendar years 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2014 Master and Supplemental Jury Wheel. The data should include participant number, pool summoned for, date of summoning, type of jury service (grand or petit), and disposition for each summons sent during the life of the wheel. The disposition should indicate whether the summons was returned undeliverable, not responded to, disqualified, reason for ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.