CRITICS OF GRAND JURIES ALSO CHARGED THAT GRAND JURY PERFORMANCE RESULTS FROM THEIR RESEMBLANCE TO HOMOGENEOUS COMMUNITY ELITES. IN THE STUDY, 38 GRAND JURIES FROM HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS, WERE EXAMINED FOR RACIAL COMPOSITION, AGE DISTRIBUTION, AND SOCIOECONOMIC HETEROGENEITY, AND FOR THEIR PROPENSITY TO RETURN NO BILLS. NO-BILL PROPENSITY WAS CHOSEN BECAUSE THE LITERATURE INDICATES THAT IT IS THE MOST COMMON INDICATOR OF GRAND JURY INDEPENDENCE. MULTIPLE CORRELATION ANALYSIS INDICATED THAT VARIANCE IN NO-BILL PROPENSITY IS CLEARLY RELATED TO JURY COMPOSITION HETEROGENEITY. A TOTAL OF 45 PERCENT OF THE VARIATION IN NO-BILL PROPENSITY WAS EXPLAINED BY THE COMBINED COMPOSITION MEASURES. SURPRISING FINDINGS WERE THAT SOCIOECONOMIC HETEROGENEITY EXPLAINED 69 PERCENT OF THE EXPLAINED VARIANCE AND THAT INCREASED RACIAL HETEROGENEITY HAD A MINOR INFLUENCE AND WAS ASSOCIATED WITH HIGHER INDICTMENT RATES, PERHAPS BECAUSE MINORITY MEMBERS OF GRAND JURIES CAME FROM ELITE SEGMENTS OF THE MINORITY COMMUNITY. IN CONTRAST TO THESE FINDINGS, SUPREME COURT DECISIONS ON JURY COMPOSITION HAVE FOCUSED ON RACIAL AND GENDER CHARACTERISTICS BUT HAVE REFUSED TO RECOGNIZE SOCIOECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS AS RELEVANT TO GRAND JURY SELECTION. RESULTS OF THE STUDY INDICATED THAT RACE AND GENDER ARE INSUFFICIENT INDICATORS OF COMMUNITY REPRESENTATION AND THAT SOCIOECONOMIC REPRESENTATIVENESS IS NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE DUE PROCESS AND EQUAL PROTECTION FOR CRIMINAL DEFENDANTS. IF FURTHER RESEARCH SUPPORTS THESE RESULTS, THE SUPREME COURT MAY NEED TO REASSESS ITS POSITION. FOOTNOTES, TABLES, AND A BIBLIOGRAPHY ARE INCLUDED. (CFW)