In re Tsarnaev, No. 15-1170 (1st Cir. 2015)
Annotate this CasePetitioner Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was charged with multiple crimes arising out of the bombings at the Boston Marathon on April 15, 2013. After jury selection commenced, Petitioner filed his third motion to change venue, asserting that pretrial publicity and public attitudes were so hostile and inflammatory that he would be unable to receive a trial before a fair and impartial jury in Boston. Petitioner then filed a second petition for mandamus, which largely made the same claims and relied on the same types of data as the third motion for change of venue. The district court denied the third motion for change of venue. The First Circuit denied the second mandamus petition after noting that knowledge of a high-profile case does not equate to disqualifying prejudice, holding that Petitioner failed to demonstrate a clear and indisputable right to mandamus relief because (1) it was not clear and indisputable that pretrial publicity required a change of venue; (2) the ongoing jury selection process did not suggest pervasive prejudice; (3) Petitioner failed to demonstrate irreparable harm; and (4) the balance of equities did not favor granting mandamus relief.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.