# Appendix — LaChance v. United States > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40385018_2180%3A2 ## Record - **Collection:** Supreme Court brief - **Document type:** Appendix - **Published:** January 1, 1986 - **Citation:** 479 U.S. 883 ## Text (9 Supreme Court, U.S. ve) 8 | eC! 1966 JOSEPH F. SPANIOL, JR. CLERK IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITFD! STATES October Term, 1985 WILLIAM G. LaCHANCE, WILLIAM F. ZIMMERLI, Petitioners, -VS- UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent APPENDIX TO PETITION FOR A WRIT -OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT IRA B. GRUDBERG, §SQ. Jacobs, Grudberg, Belt & Dow, P.C. 350 Orange Street New Haven, Connecticut 06503 (203) 772-3100 Counsel of Record for Petitioner Zimmerli NINA J. GINSBERG, ESQ. Zwerling, Mark, Ginsberg and Lieberman, P.C. 1001 Duke Street Alexander, Virginia 22314 (703) 549-4333 Counsel of Record for Petitioner LaChance ALICE S. MISKIMIN, ESQ. Jacobs, Grudberg, Belt & Dow, P.C. 350 Orange Street New Haven, Connecticut 06503 Of Counsel 2. 3. TARLE OF CONTENTS Page Ruling on Motion for Rehearing, filed May 15, Sees iateccesécoscsodhs Opinion and Judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, filed April 14, EE Transcript, Pretrial Proceedings, May 2, 1984, United States District Court, District of Connecticut, No. B-83-57 (TFDG)....A63 Ruling, July 10, 1984, endorsed on Defendants’ Answer Verified Motion to Dismiss Indictment and Stay Proceedings on Grounds of Substantial Failure to Comply with law on the Selection of Grand and Petit Jurors. ..++seeee++ A606 Verified Motion to Dismiss Indictment and Stay Proceedings on Grounds of Substantial Failure to Comply with Law on the Selection of Grand and Petit jurors...ssecesees eAb8 Affidavit of Dr. John Lamberth.....A80 WYATT, District Judge: These are separate appeals, consolidated in this court, of four defendants—William G. LaChance, William F. Zimmerli, John Schlagenhauf, and Thomas Ciccaglione —named in a superseding indictment returned against -AS- them and many other persons by a grand jury in the United States District Court for the District of Connecti- cut. Appellant Schlagenhauf was named in the supersed- ing indictment as, and is often called in other papers of record, “John Schlaganauf,” apparently a misspelling of his surname; for convenience, he will usually be referred to herein as “John.” Appellant Ciccaglione will usually be referred to, for convenience, as “Thomas.” This prosecution had its beginnings on September 14, 1983, when the Coast Guard stopped and boarded the sailing vessel “Tho” in Long Island Sound some two miles from the mouth of the Connecticut River in the District of Connecticut. Appellant LaChance was aboard as Captain of the Tho and, after 4,300 pounds of mari- juana was found on the ship and seized, LaChance and the two crew members were turned over by the Coast Guard to Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) agents who placed them under arrest. Marijuana is a Schedule I controlled substance (21 U.S.C. § 812(c) (Schedule I) (c)(10)), the distribution, possession with intent to distribute, and importation of which is unlawful (21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 952). An indictment was returned on September 21, 1983, by a federal grand jury at Bridgeport in the District of Connecticut. A superseding indictment was returned by the same federal grand jury on March 6, 1984, against the four appellants and many other persons; there were twenty-nine counts in the superseding indictment. The indictment and superseding indictment were assigned to Chief Judge Daly. The superseding indictment covered a time period from January 1976 to the date it was returned. The subject ~A6 8s CITY OF ALEXANDRIA : Caro West /s/ arolyn West Notary Public My commission expires June 5, 1987. ~480- COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA AFFIDAVIT JOHN LAMBERTH, of full age, being duly sworn according to law deposes and says: 1. I am an associate professor of psychology at Temple University in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, as is indicated in my curriculum vitae appended hereto. I am Director of the Division of Social Psychology at Temple University. My credentials include a Ph.D. in psychology and extensive experience and publishing in matters relative to selection and composition of grand and petit jurys. 2. Prior to making this affidavit, I examined the Local Plan for the District of -A81- Connecticut, implementing the Jury Selection and Service Act, and consulted with Kevin F... Rowe, Chief Deputy Clerk in charge of jury matters. 3. Under my supervision data concerning the selection and composition of grand and petit jurys and grand jurys and their forepersons were collected between December 21 and 29, 1982 in the Bridgeport Division of the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut. Further information was supplied to me by Mr. Rowe concerning grand jurys in letters dated Jarwary 5 and 16, 1984, and in several telephone conversations with Mr. Rowe and Chrystine W. Cody, Deputy Clerk. The data covered the master and qualified wheels of 1977 and 1981 and the grand jurys associated with these -A82- wheels. All questionnaires of qualified and disqualified, exempted, excused or excluded individuals in both master wheels were examined. The data for the qualified wheel is properly seen as the population of qualified individuals in the 1977 and 1981 wheels in the Bridgeport Division and the data for the master wheel is properly seen as a sample of the source list for the 1977 and 1981 wheels of the Bridgeport Division. According to information supplied by Mr. Rowe, all data prior to the 1977 wheel has been destroyed. The results of analyzing the data are as follows: a. Blacks were statistically, significantly and substantially under-represented in the master wheels, which are comprised of the qualified and -A83- disqualified individuals (the source list). Only 3.52% of those listed in the master wheels were black compared to a black population in the District of 6.98% of the voting age population according to the 1980 census. This is a comparative disparity of 49.57% and the percentage obtained is 8.46 standard deviations below the expected percentage. The probability of this result occurring by chance is less than 2 in 1,000,000. b. Blacks were statistically, significantly and substantially under-represented in the qualified wheels. Only 4.83% of those listed in the qualified wheels were black compared to a black population in the District of 6.98% of the voting age population according to the 1980 -A84- census. This is a comparative disparity of 30.80% and the percentage obtained is 3.69 standard deviations below the expected percentage. The probability of this result occurring by chance is less than 4 in 10,000. c. Women were statistically, significantly and substantially under-represented in the qualified wheels. Only 48.91% of those listed in the qualified wheels were women compared to a female population in the District of 53.17% of the voting age population according to the 1980 census. This is a comparative disparity of 8.01% and the percentage obtained is 3.77 standard deviations below the expected percentage. The probability of this result occurring by chance is less than 2 in 10,000. -AR5- d. Women were statistically, significantly and substantially under-represented among grand jury forepersons. Of the seven grand jurys for which records are available to me, up to and including the one that indicted LaChance, zero females were forepersons. This is a comparative disparity of 100% and the percentage obtained is 2.44 standard deviations below the expected percentage. The probability of this result occurring by chance is less than 2 in 100. e. Of 2040 disqualified juror questionnaires examined, 232 were disqualified inaccurately constituting an error rate of 11.37% 4, Examination of the data indicates that the sources of these large disparities -A86- and nonrandom selection of jurors may include, but are not limited to the following: a. Source list inadequacies. b. Erroneous permanent disqualifications, exemptions, excusals or exclusions, based on insufficient medical documentation. c. Erroneous permanent disqualifications, exemptions, excusals or exclusions based on previous jury duty. d. Erroneous permanent disqualifications, exemptions, excusals or exclusions based on occupation. e. Erroneous permanent disqualifications, exemptions, excusals or exclusions based upon child care. f. Erroneous permanent ~A87- disqualification, exemptions, excusals or exclusions based upon student status. g.- Usurpation of judicial functions by jury clerks. h. Erroneous inclusion of permanently excused and exempted jurors in the qualified wheels. 5. On the basis of my training and research in social psychology, group dynamics and group leadership, I would testify that because of the power associated with being a leader and the inordinate amount of social influence the leader exerts, particularly one appointed by a judge or megistrate, the effect of under-representation of women as grand jury forepersons is to reduce the representation of women on the grand jury. The facts set forth herein are true and -A-88- correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. John Lamberth /s/ Jonn Lamberth, Ph.D. SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me this lst day of FEBRUARY, 1983. , /s/ ‘AR IC My commission expires: 10/23/84 Name: Birthdate: Address: Phone: Marital Status: Education -A89- VITA John Lamberth September 12, 1936 Department of Psychology Temple University Philadelphia, PA 19122 (215) 787-1554 22 Hillside Drive Malvern, PA 19355 (215) 296-0659 Married, two children Austin College 1954-1958 B.A. in 1958 Harvard University 1958-1961 B.D. in 1961 San Jose State College 1966-1967 University of Texas 1967-1969 Purdue University 1969-1970 M.S. in 1970 Ph.D. in 1970 -A90- Fellowships and Scholarships Received N.S.F. Summer Teaching Assistant Tranineeship 1968 N.I.M.H. Traineeship 1968-1969 N.I.M.H. Pre-doctoral Research Fellowship 1969-1970 Postdoctoral Positions Associate Professor Temple University 1973-present Assistant Professor University of Oklahoma 1970-1973 Editorial Responsibilities Ad hoc consultant for: Journal of Personali ou Personality = Lamberth, J., & Kosteski, D. Mastery teaching with and without incentives for repeating quizzes. Teaching of Psychology, 1979, 6, 71-74, Lamberth, J., & Kosteski, D. Student evaluations: An assessment of validity. Teaching of Psychology, 1981, 8, 8-11. Lamberth, J., & Kimmel, A.J. The application of scientific knowledge: Ethical issues and responsibilities in the behavioral -A99- sciences. In A. J. Kimmel (ed.) New directions for eooreee es of social and behavioral science: Ethics for human-subjects research, San Francisco: Josey-Bass, 1981. Lamberth, J., Krieger, E., & Shay, S. Juror decision-making: A case of attitude change mediated by authoritarianism. Journal of Research in Personality, in press. Lamberth, J., Shay, S., & Krieger, E. Do juries polarize? (Submitted.) Papers Read Ryrne, D., Lamberth, J., & Palmer, J., Sequential effects in responding to attitudinal stimli," at the Psychonomic Society, St. Louis, October, 1968. Lamberth, J., "Differential magnitude of reward and magnitude shifts using attitudinal stimli," at the Southwestern Psychological Association, Austin, April 1969. Lamberth, J., & Gay, R.A. "Differential reward magnitude using a performance measure and attitudinal stimli," at the Western Psychological Association, Vancouver, June 1969. Lamberth, J., "The effects of contirmal responding on the contrast effect in attraction research," at the Psychonamic -A100- Society, St. Louis, Novemer 1969. Byrne, D., & Lamberth, J. "Reinforcement theories and cognitive theories as complementary approaches to the study of attraction." Paper presented at a symposium on attraction theory, Connecticut College, October 1970. Lamberth, J., "The effect of sequential variables on performance using attitudinal stimuli," at the Psychonamic Society, San Antonio, November 1970. Padd, W., & Lamberth, J. "Competence as a variable in interpersonal attraction," at the Southwestern Psychological Association, Oklahoma City, April 1972. Lamberth, J., & Dyck, D.G. "Conditioning and attraction: A relationship," at the Psychonamic Society, St. Louis, 1972. Lamberth, J., & Padd, W. "Stimulus generalization: Affect and attraction," at the Psychonomic Society, St. Louis, 1973. Lamberth, J., & Kirby, D.A. "The lawyers' dilemma: Authoritarianism and jury selection," at the Midwestern Psychological Association, Chicago, May 1974. Lamberth, J., Krieger, E.C., & Walbridge, R.H. “Jury verdicts of authoritarians and equalitarians in simulated criminal trials," at the Psychonomic Society, Denver, November 1975. ; Lamberth, J., & Krieger, E. "Deliberation: A crucial aspect of jury research," at the — Society, St. Louis, November 1976. Symposia and Invited Addresses Lamberth, J. "Introductory psychology - A student's perspective." Paper presented as part of the symposium, "Teaching Introductory Psychology: Issues, Innovations and Perspectives," at the American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C., 1976. (Other participants in the symposium were George S. Reynolds, Phillip G. Zimbardo, Richard A. Kasschau, Kenneth MacCorquodale, Robert S. Daniel, and Stanford C. Ericksen. ) Lamberth, J. (Chair) Mastery instructional systems: "Innovations, problems, and possibly some solutions," at the American Psychological Association, San Francisco, August 1977. Lamberth, J. "Scientifically selecting juries." Invited address at the Camden County Bar Association, Cherry Hill, N.J., March, 1980. The Camden County Bar Association, Cherry Hill, N.J., March 1980. Lamberth, J. "Jury selection: A psychological approach." Invited address at -102- the American Trial Lawyers Association--New Jersey, Moorestown, NJ, Jan., 1981. --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40385018_2180%3A2. Public record. Not legal advice.