member of any of these groups. As the Supreme Court has held, “[i]n order to show that an equal protection violation has occurred in the context of grand jury selection, the defendant must show that the procedure employed resulted in substantial underrepresentation of his race or of the identifiable group to which he belongs.” Castaneda, 430 U.S. at 494, 97 S.Ct. 1272 (emphasis added). See also Haworth, 948 F.Supp. at 982-83 (noting that defendants abandoned their Fifth Amendment equal protection claims because they lacked standing because they were not members of the allegedly underrepresented groups). While Taylor has no standing to assert these claims under the Fifth Amendment, he does have standing to assert them under the Sixth Amendment. See Taylor, 419 U.S. at 526, 95 S.Ct. 692 (<HOLDING>); Shinault, 147 F.3d at 1271 (same). The only
holding that a defendant need not be a member of the excluded group in order to assert a sixth amendment faircrosssection claim holding that the court lacks jurisdiction over sixth amendment claims because the sixth amendment is not moneymandating holding that a criminal defendant has a sixth amendment right to counsel at trial recognizing that the sixth amendment is not violated every time the public is excluded from a courtroom an unjustified closure may on its facts be so trivial as not to violate the sixth amendment guarantee holding that the fact of a prior conviction for sentencing purposes need not be proved to a jury or admitted by defendant to satisfy the sixth amendment