People v. Mata

THE COURT.

We have before us two applications, one filed by appellant Mata and titled “Application for Leave to Pile Supplemental Opening Brief and Supporting Affidavit and Supplemental Brief.” The other is an application by Alianza Hispano-Americana (Spanish-American Alliance), a fraternal organization, to file a brief amicus curiae on behalf of appellants.

[206]

In the application to file a brief amicus curiae it is pointed out that "The Alianza Hispano-Amerieana, is concerned about the equality of treatment accorded minority groups and especially persons of Mexican ancestry and has, in this regard, created and established a special Civil Eights Department. Consistent with this policy, the Alianza has sponsored programs throughout the south-western part of the United States geared to achieve freedom of Spanish speaking peoples from discrimination in education, employment, housing and other phases of American life.”

In support of this application to file the foregoing briefs appellants urge that because of adverse newspaper publicity concerning the events which gave rise to the trial, the appellants ’ motion in the court below for a change of venue should have been granted; that the

voir dire

examination of the jury would disclose the influence of the newspaper publicity, consequently that the

voir dire

should have been included in the record on appeal.

In the court below appellants made application for augmentation of the record to include the following beyond the normal record on appeal:

1. The

voir dire

examination of the jury;

2. The proceedings and motions made by counsel preliminary to the taking of any evidence.

The application was denied by the trial judge on the ground that insofar as appellants ’ claim that the entire panel of jurors was prejudiced against them and had prejudged the case, the record reflected that the accused were entitled to 35 peremptory challenges and used only 11 of them; that had the