You see, each attorney gets to remove a certain number of jurors. I can remove three jurors for any reason. If I choose to remove any three jurors, I simply whip out my "Remove this juror" card and away they go, back to the jury room.
Full Answer
You see, each attorney gets to remove a certain number of jurors. I can remove three jurors for any reason. If I choose to remove any three jurors, I simply whip out my "Remove this juror" card and away they go, back to the jury room. I don't have to tell anyone why I removed this juror either. How cool is that? I don't like juror #3.
For example, imagine a defense lawyer who challenges a would-be juror whose brother-in-law is a prosecutor. The venireperson assures the court that she could be fair, and the judge denies the challenge. Convinced that the juror would not be fair, the defense attorney uses one of his peremptories to excuse her.
 · The average juror will serve three to four days on trial, and many jurors will be in and out after only a one- or two-day commitment. If you are unlucky enough to find yourself on a long, drawn-out case (like a serious crime or a major civil dispute), you may end up working on that case for months, but that is very rare.
For example, a juror can be dismissed for cause if he or she is a close relative of one of the parties or one of the lawyers, or if he or she works for a company that is part of the lawsuit. Each lawyer may request the dismissal of an unlimited number of jurors for cause. Each request will be considered by the judge and may or may not be allowed.
Yet all courts provide for the questioning of potential jurors to expose reasons why the individual might not make an ideal juror—one who can be impartial and fair. To that end, lawyers and the judge question each would-be juror, looking for evidence of impermissible bias. When such bias is uncovered, the individual will be excused “for cause,” which means that the lawyer making the challenge can articulate to the judge an acceptable reason for rejecting that person.
The crowd of people who show up at the courthouse with jury summons in hand are known as “venirepersons, ” which means that they are potential jurors (the group is called “the venire"). In large courthouses, in particular, it’s common for venirepersons to be given a form to complete, which asks a number of questions regarding the individuals’ personal circumstances. At this point (if not before, upon receiving the summons), a potential juror can request a deferral or ask to be excused due to the need, for example, to tend a sick family member or to take care of small children. The judge, sometimes in consultation with the lawyers on the case, will review these questionnaires and excuse venirepersons as appropriate (often with a promise that they’ll be called again soon).
Convinced that the juror would not be fair , the defense attorney uses one of his peremptories to excuse her. Another theory for the use of peremptories is that by letting each side dispense with the most unacceptable members of the jury, it results in a more middle-of-the road jury, one not subject to extreme views.
Although lawyers don’t have to give a reason for using a peremptory, they may not use them in order to rid the jury of people of a certain race, religion, gender, or other protected status. If a pattern begins to emerge—the prosecutor excuses every Black juror but no White members—the judge will intervene.
The questioning process comes with its own legal name—voir dire (vwar deer ). The questions are designed to elicit bias and predisposition.
Personal experiences that might affect the person’s ability to judge the case. While a venireperson’s experience with the subject matter of the case might make that person an informed juror, it might also make him a biased one. For instance, someone who has himself been the victim of a similar crime might be prone to project his trauma onto ...
Criminal defendants are entitled to a jury of their peers. Those jurors are practically drafted, called as a result of having registered to vote or after obtaining a drivers’ license. Failing to answer or lying on a jury summons is a crime, and "getting out of jury duty" is no easy task. Yet all courts provide for the questioning ...
Lawyers want to know they are choosing a juror who will be persuaded by details and evidence presented in the courtroom, not blinded by fake news they researched prior to the case. Being a know-it-all and being vocal about it may just get you excused from your seat.
As a juror, you will likely receive $40–$50 daily for your time. Some employers will still pay their employees during this time; however, legally employers do not have to pay their employees. If you can prove via payroll and last year’s tax return that losing your standard pay rate will be detrimental to you and your family, the court may excuse you.
Jury duty may be a short commitment, or it may be a long one . The average juror will serve three to four days on trial, and many jurors will be in and out after only a one- or two-day commitment.
Receiving a summon means that you need to show up for the juror selection process. During juror selection, about one hundred people will report for duty, and only about 15–20 of those people will end up participating as members of a jury.
Most police officers, lawyers, doctors, and government officials will be dismissed because of their extensive industry knowledge and experience.
If you are asked to serve on a jury, you may need to set aside a few weeks of your time. Do you have a knee surgery scheduled for next week? Is there an important appointment with your neurologist scheduled tomorrow? Missing these appointments could be harmful to your health. Bring records of your scheduled appointments to voir dire if you want to present these medical necessities as reasons to be excused .
Depending on your state of residence, your age can excuse you from jury duty. In many states, men and women over age 70 are exempt from serving as jurors. Check your state's age requirements for jury service.
Steps in a Trial 1 In civil cases, especially in courts of limited jurisdiction, the standard size in many jurisdictions is becoming six, which can be increased by stipulation of both parties. 2 In misdemeanor cases there are sometimes fewer than twelve jurors, though in serious criminal cases twelve jurors are generally required. 3 The old requirement that juries be unanimous is also changing. In misdemeanor and civil cases particularly, states often provide for verdicts based on the agreement of three-fourths or five-sixths of the jurors.
In many jurisdictions, jury selection begins with the court clerk's calling twelve people on the jury list and asking them to take a place in the jury box. The judge usually makes a brief statement explaining what kind of case is to be tried and inquiring whether there is any reason the potential jurors cannot serve.
Alternate jurors are selected in some cases to take the place of jurors who may become ill during the trial. Alternate jurors hear the evidence just as the other jurors do, but they don’t participate in the deliberations unless they replace an original juror.
Once impaneled, the jurors’ role is to listen to the evidence conscientiously and not draw premature conclusions. They are instructed by the judge not to discuss the case with outsiders or each other (until deliberations). They generally do not have the right to ask questions of witnesses, but some judges permit jurors to submit written questions for the judge and lawyers to consider. (The lawyers have a right to object to these questions, just as they do to questions posed by lawyers during the trial.) If appropriate, the questions may be asked.
In civil cases, especially in courts of limited jurisdiction, the standard size in many jurisdictions is becoming six, which can be increased by stipulation of both parties.
Each request will be considered by the judge and may or may not be allowed. In addition to challenges for cause, each lawyer has a specific number of peremptory challenges. These challenges permit a lawyer to excuse a potential juror without stating a cause.
If either lawyer believes there is information that suggests a juror is prejudiced about the case, he or she can ask the judge to dismiss that juror for cause. For example, a juror can be dismissed for cause if he or she is a close relative of one of the parties or one of the lawyers, or if he or she works for a company that is part of the lawsuit. Each lawyer may request the dismissal of an unlimited number of jurors for cause. Each request will be considered by the judge and may or may not be allowed.
The state can bring the case as many times as they want until they either get a conviction or a not guilty.
No limit. However, any many cases the district attorney can view a hung jury as reasonable doubt and choose not to retry. There are other factors for the DA to consider, such as the split of the jury and the seriousness of the case. Most lawyers view a hung jury as a positive outcome for the defendant.
There is no limit on the number of times that the prosecution may retry a case in the event of a hung jury. It is up to the prosecution. On one hand, a hung jury might force the prosecution to make a more reasonable plea offer. On the other hand, a hung jury could make the prosecution dig in their heels even further. It all depends upon the case and the attitudes of the prosecution.
At any point after a criminal trial starts, a judge must remove any juror when it becomes clear that the person is disqualified for any of the “for cause” reasons for disqualifying potential jurors before trial, including: refusal or inability to follow the law.
And although 12-member juries are required for federal crimes, judges in district courts may allow a jury of 11 people to return a verdict if it has found it necessary to excuse a juror after the start of deliberations (Fed. Rules Crim. Proc., rule 23 (b) (2019)).
The process of selecting a jury (known as voir dire) is meant to weed out potential jurors who can’t or won’t be fair. But even after members of the jury are selected and the trial has started, the judges may decide that it’s necessary to remove a juror because that person is not qualified or able to continue serving. What happens next depends on several factors, including the availability of alternate jurors, the stage of the trial, and the jurisdiction (which federal or state court) where the trial is taking place.
Jurors could be removed if they don’t follow important instructions from the judge, such as not using cell phones during trial proceedings, avoiding media coverage of the case, or not bringing outside information into the jury room.
After removing a juror, a judge will move ahead in one of three ways: by replacing the juror, continuing the trial with a smaller jury, or declaring a mistrial.
Judges have considerable leeway (“discretion,” in legal jargon) when removing jurors. That means circumstances or conduct that lead to disqualification in one court may not have that result in another court, and an appellate court will ordinarily defer to the judge’s decision. At the same time, however, there must be factual evidence supporting that decision, as well as a valid legal reason that serves the purpose of preserving the integrity of the judicial process. The reason must be personal and specific to the individual juror being dismissed; it shouldn’t have anything to do with the issues in the case.
After a trial has started, a judge may dismiss a juror who’s disqualified or unable to continue serving on the jury. Learn about the valid reasons and procedure for removing and replacing jurors, and what happens when no alternates are available. One of the cornerstones of the U.S. criminal justice system is the constitutional right ...
Such cases are typically VERY complicated and full of pitfalls. Not having a lawyer prosecute such cases is a very very poor choice typically resulting in lots of fighting but a lost war.
The defendant is able to file a motion to reconsider after a motion is denied. If you are ready for trial, file your notice. If not, then file you discovery, set your depositions and move the case forward. On the positive side, you have won each of the motions they have filed.
Both the U.S. and the California Constitution prohibit the use of peremptory challenges to remove prospective jurors basely solely on an impermissible group bias. People v. Wheeler (1978) 22 Cal.3d 258 and Batson v. Kentucky (1986) 476 U.S. 79. The most commonly seen impermissible group bias is one based on race.
In reviewing the trial court record in Chism’s case, the Supreme Court found the trial court made such sincere and reasoned effort and thus, affirmed Chism’s sentence.
Chism then appealed through the appellate court level and up to the California Supreme Court, which affirmed the trial court ( People v. Calvin Dion Chism (2014 DJDAR 5615)).
However, when a defendant is African American and the prosecutor uses all his peremptory challenges (up to ten ) to dismiss African Americans, it does seem clear that the peremptory challenges are based on race.
Indeed, there is a constitutional concept we all grow up with that one is to be judged by a jury of one’s peers.
One of the most basic principles of American legal system is that a jury must reach a unanimous verdict to convict a defendant accused of a crime. Jurors are expected to be impartial and determine the facts based on the law, as instructed by the judge. While a judge may dismiss a juror once a trial has begun if they cannot render impartial service, the court should never remove a juror simply to guarantee a guilty verdict. Put another way, if a lone juror is “holding out” due to a good-faith belief in the defendant’s innocence, it is not the judge’s role to step in and replace that juror with one more disposed towards a conviction.
Juror #8 said Juror #13 told the jurors during deliberations that the “Holy Ghost” had told her the defendant “was not guilty on all charges.”
A jury trial is every criminal defendant’s basic right. An experienced Tampa criminal defense lawyer can assist you in protecting this and other important constitutional rights. Contact the Faulkner Law Group, PLLC, today if you need to speak with an attorney right away.
The case, United States v. Brown, involved a former member of Congress charged with multiple federal crimes. The case was tried before a jury in Jacksonville in 2017.
A case may be postponed as many times as the court deems it to be necessary. As long as there is an acceptable reason to grant a continuance, the court may grant it and prolong a legal proceeding.
Generally, courts are more reluctant to grant continuances in criminal cases than in civil cases because the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution grants individuals facing criminal charges the right to a speedy trial. In a civil case, there is no similar right, as the outcome of a civil case is typically compensation for the injured party, rather than justice for a victim or an accused defendant.
Common lengths of time for case continuances are six to eight months, but it may take longer or shorter, depending on the case.
When the court receives a Motion to Continue, it may, at its discretion, approve or deny the motion. Typically, the court approves motions that cite valid reasons for pursuing continuance. A Motion to Continue has three parts: the Motion, the Memorandum of Points and Authorities and the Declaration.
Law Office of Renkin & Associates: California has a 6-Month Waiting Period for Divorce, So What Now?
California law states that an individual facing a felony charge must be tried within 60 days of his arraignment unless his attorney can provide a good reason to delay the trial. Cases involving special victims like minors and the elderly must be tried within 30 days of arraignment.
This could be because a judge or prosecutor is ill, because the evidence provided has been found to be false, or because one or more proper court procedures, such as filing case-related documents by their deadline, have not occurred. A case may be postponed as many times as the court deems it to be necessary.