The case involved charges against a black juvenile involving first degree murder on two counts, three counts of illegal use of a handgun, one count of carrying a handgun, one count of attempted escape, and one count of assault with attempt to murder. The defense argued self-defense as the juvenile secured a police officer's gun to protect himself from the officer's assault and temporary insanity as the youth rushed from the station house room firing the gun randomly. Defense decisions regarding change of venue, any prejudgments on the case, and juror selection were based on a survey of persons eligible for jury service (registered voters). The survey was designed to serve the following purposes: (1) evidence to support a motion for change of venue if this strategy were to be chosen, (2) grounds for extensive and individual questioning of potential jurors should extensive prejudgment on the case be revealed, (3) the identification of groups in the community likely to be open to the defense's case, and (4) the identification of commonly held beliefs in the community regarding police brutality. The survey helped the defense to decide to pursue the case in the county of jurisdiction, since the survey showed a general perception of extensive police brutality in the county, particularly against blacks. Juror selection was also aided by survey results. The defendant was not convicted of first or second degree murder but rather of voluntary manslaughter, and he was found not guilty of the second killing by reason of temporary insanity. He was found guilty of illegal use of a handgun. Ten footnotes and three references are provided.