{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "9",
    "document_number": "Case 1:17-cr-00365-DLC Document 1859 Filed 03/24/21 Page 20 of 20",
    "date": "03/24/21",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "circuit have defined the relevant jury pool with reference to \"the systematic defect identified by the defendant.\" Rioux, F. Supp. at 1565-66; see Allen, 2021 WL 431458, *5 (defining jury pool as both \"the White Plains master wheel and the White Plains qualified wheel\" because the defendants' allegations impacted both venires). Under that approach, the jury venire that bears the brunt of the defendant's allegations of systematic exclusion is determined to be the relevant jury pool. See Allen, 2021 WL 431458, *5; Rioux, F. Supp. at 1565-66. Here, Schulte's allegations of systematic exclusion center almost entirely on the juror selection procedures for the White Plains master wheel.4 See infra 15-17. Accordingly, the appropriate venire is the White Plains master wheel.\n\nii. Relevant Community\n\nThe most significant point of dispute between the parties is which counties constitute the relevant community. According to Schulte, the relevant community must be the counties that feed jurors to Manhattan because that is where his trial will be held. (Schulte Br. at 8; Schulte Reply at 3-5, ECF 454.) But the Government responds that the northern counties from which White Plains draws jurors represent the relevant community. (Gov't Opp. Br. at 9-14, 18.) The Court agrees with the Government.\n\nAs a preliminary matter, it should be noted that the Southern District is not statutorily divided into discrete divisions. See 28 U.S.C. § 112. Rather, the statutory law prescribes one District that is composed of the following counties: Bronx, Dutchess, New York, Orange, Putnam, Rockland, Sullivan, and Westchester. See id. Yet, what the statutory law leaves\n\n4 For example, if Schulte had alleged that the juror questionnaire form displayed systematic exclusion, see supra 4 n. 1, then the qualified wheel would be the appropriate jury venire for comparison. Because he does not do that, the master wheel must be the relevant venire.\n\n9\n\nDOJ-OGR-00002830",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "circuit have defined the relevant jury pool with reference to \"the systematic defect identified by the defendant.\" Rioux, F. Supp. at 1565-66; see Allen, 2021 WL 431458, *5 (defining jury pool as both \"the White Plains master wheel and the White Plains qualified wheel\" because the defendants' allegations impacted both venires). Under that approach, the jury venire that bears the brunt of the defendant's allegations of systematic exclusion is determined to be the relevant jury pool. See Allen, 2021 WL 431458, *5; Rioux, F. Supp. at 1565-66. Here, Schulte's allegations of systematic exclusion center almost entirely on the juror selection procedures for the White Plains master wheel.4 See infra 15-17. Accordingly, the appropriate venire is the White Plains master wheel.",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "ii. Relevant Community",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The most significant point of dispute between the parties is which counties constitute the relevant community. According to Schulte, the relevant community must be the counties that feed jurors to Manhattan because that is where his trial will be held. (Schulte Br. at 8; Schulte Reply at 3-5, ECF 454.) But the Government responds that the northern counties from which White Plains draws jurors represent the relevant community. (Gov't Opp. Br. at 9-14, 18.) The Court agrees with the Government.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "As a preliminary matter, it should be noted that the Southern District is not statutorily divided into discrete divisions. See 28 U.S.C. § 112. Rather, the statutory law prescribes one District that is composed of the following counties: Bronx, Dutchess, New York, Orange, Putnam, Rockland, Sullivan, and Westchester. See id. Yet, what the statutory law leaves",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "4 For example, if Schulte had alleged that the juror questionnaire form displayed systematic exclusion, see supra 4 n. 1, then the qualified wheel would be the appropriate jury venire for comparison. Because he does not do that, the master wheel must be the relevant venire.",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "9",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00002830",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Schulte"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "Government",
      "Court"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "Manhattan",
      "White Plains",
      "Bronx",
      "Dutchess",
      "New York",
      "Orange",
      "Putnam",
      "Rockland",
      "Sullivan",
      "Westchester",
      "Southern District"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "03/24/21"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "Case 1:17-cr-00365-DLC",
      "Document 1859",
      "ECF 454",
      "28 U.S.C. § 112",
      "DOJ-OGR-00002830"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to a criminal case, discussing the relevant jury pool and community for the trial. The text is mostly printed, with some footnotes and a page number at the bottom. There are no visible stamps or handwritten text."
}