What do lawyers look for when selecting a jury? 1. Your relationships. 2. Your experience with the law. 3. Your internet footprint. 4. Your religion. 5. Your attitude.
Lawyers and judges select juries by a process known as "voir dire," which is Latin for "to speak the truth." In voir dire, the judge and attorneys for both sides ask potential jurors questions to determine if they are competent and suitable to serve in the case. Errors during jury selection are common grounds for appeal in criminal cases.
Penal Code 92 PC is the California statute that makes it a crime for a person to bribe a judge, juror, or any person authorized to hear and determine a legal matter. A violation of this law is a felony offense punishable by up to 4 years in jail or state prison.
When the jury member brings outside evidence that they may have found themselves into the trial which has not been allowed by the judges or lawyers and is used to create bias on the part of the juror.
Accidental Influence Improper juror influence can occur without jury tampering?or even jury misconduct. Neither tampering nor misconduct has occurred if the juror follows the judge's instructions and no one tries to assert sway over the juror.
Variables considered include demographic information on jurors, personal characteristics of trial participants, influence of trial publicity on jurors, juror satisfaction with the verdict, and dynamics of the deliberation process.
If the judge discovers that you are misrepresenting yourself during the selection process, she can charge you with contempt and put you in jail.
Phillips (1982) 455 U.S. 209, 217.) A sitting juror's actual bias, which would have supported a challenge for cause, renders him unable to perform his duty and thus subject to discharge and substitution. (People v.
Examples of jury tampering may include providing outside information to a juror and bribing, threating or intimidating a juror to influence the verdict. Both lawyers and jurors themselves can be involved in jury tampering. Jury tampering is not only an ethical infraction, but a criminal offense.
No, a judge cannot overturn a hung jury and the judge can only overrule a conviction if they think it is 'unsafe'. Is a hung jury good or bad? A hung jury is bad for everyone: The defendant faces continued uncertainty.
The Double Jeopardy Clause in the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution prohibits anyone from being prosecuted twice for substantially the same crime. The relevant part of the Fifth Amendment states, "No person shall . . . be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb . . . . "
It is not necessary that a jury be unanimous in its verdict. In a criminal case, a verdict need not be unanimous where there are not fewer than 11 jurors if 10 of them agree on a verdict after considering the case for a reasonable time (not less than two hours).
The jurors meet in a room outside the courtroom to decide whether the prosecutor has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty. All the jurors must agree on the decision or verdict – their decision must be unanimous.
After reaching a decision, the jury notifies the bailiff, who notifies the judge. All of the participants reconvene in the courtroom and the decision is announced. The announcement may be made by either the foreperson or the court clerk. Possible verdicts in criminal cases are guilty or not guilty.
Selecting the jury is the only time an attorney has the opportunity to discover the life experiences, biases, beliefs, and attitudes of the people who will decide their case. The last thing any attorney wants is for bias to come out during the trial. Thus, how lawyers pick jurors is an essential indicator of the experience and knowledge ...
When the plaintiff picks jurors, they’re looking for those who are very sympathetic, who are willing to view the prosecution as the victim in the case. Very often, union employees make for good prosecution jurors as they are used to fighting injustice.
The plaintiff will tell a jury a story of how their client was victimized by the defense, how they’ve suffered at the hands of the defendant.
In this case, “undesirable” means people who are likely to sympathize with the defense.
Jury selection is a bit like ping pong, volleyball or tennis game where there’s no out of bounds. The ball is always in motion, and there’s a constant back-and-forth going, where it’s important to always react to what you’re getting, without hesitation.
Picking the right jury is the difference between winning and losing a case. The greatest mistake that an attorney will make is trying to find a jury that’s biased towards their side, rather than trying to find one that’s as impartial as possible. Trying to find a jury that’s anything less than fair can be a fast path to losing a case , and a good lawyer knows this.
Good Jurors for the Defense. From a defense standpoint, most of the jurors that look bad for the prosecution are good for the defense. You want people who can relate to the defense, and who were on the defending end of an injury case.
After hearing evidence and closing arguments by the prosecutor and defense attorney, jurors in a criminal case listen to instructions from the judge. The instructions are explanations of the law, or the rules, that the jury should use when evaluating whether the government proved its case. For example, in a prosecution for robbery, the judge will explain to the jury that before finding the defendant guilty, it must unanimously agree, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant took something from the person of the victim using force or fear. The judge will typically expand on that rule, explaining how much force or fear is required in order to meet the standard.
For example, in a prosecution for robbery, the judge will explain to the jury that before finding the defendant guilty, it must unanimously agree, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant took something from the person of the victim using force or fear.
Questions For Your Attorney 1 I’m accused of using marijuana in a state that doesn’t allow for recreational use. Is there a chance that if I go to trial, the jury will use nullification and acquit me? 2 How do defense attorneys get the idea of nullification into the jurors’ heads, if they can’t speak of it directly? 3 Do prosecutors ever use (or hope for) jury nullification to defeat a defendant's claim of self defense?
In a way, they argue, the jury is the conscience of society, and their job is not only to decide whether the defendant did the acts charged, but whether he should be condemned and punished for it. The jury protects us from immoral or socially undesirable results.
The court’s instructions. Judges routinely admonish the jury to apply the law as explained in the instructions. Specifically, they must find the defendant guilty if they conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the charged crimes.
(The exception in many states involves a “not guilty by reason of insanity” defense. In this situation, juries return a not guilty verdict with this specification or explanation.)
Examples of Jury Nullification. Jury nullification has a long history in American law. As far back as 1735, a journal printer was accused of seditious libel for criticizing the British, but a jury ignored the law and acquitted him.
One common question presented to jurors is, “Are there any religious beliefs that prevent you from passing judgment on another person?” Frederick says this is to weed out people whose faith might impede their ability to view a case objectively .
Indeed, research shows that if you don’t vibe well with an attorney, you’re more likely to decide against their argument. “One attorney told me, 'If I can tell they don’t like me, I get rid of them,’” King says.
For example, “if it’s a medical malpractice case and there’s a woman and all of her friends are nurses, that might bias her a little bit,” says Matthew Ferrara, Ph.D, a trial consultant and forensic psychologist. And if you have friends or family in law enforcement, that’s a big red flag. “In a criminal case, relationship to someone in law enforcement is paramount,” Ferrara says. “People who are probation officers, police officers, jailers or are related to the same type of profession would be probably viewed as biased toward the prosecution.”
The plaintiff attorney or prosecutor will generally look for people more inclined to trust authority.
Leaders, contrarians, and independent thinkers can be pivotal in a verdict. These people have the potential to rally the rest of the group behind a unanimous decision, which is great for the plaintiff or the prosecutor.
But there are a few general traits attorneys take into consideration when trying to decide whether you’d help or hurt their argument. Attorneys don’t get to pick their jurors.
In New York, that means having six members of the community decide if you are more likely right than wrong.
To get you even angrier, your doctor and his attorney argue that your injuries are not really as bad as you claim them to be.
On the date your trial is scheduled to begin, testimony does not start on that date.
These are people who have been selected at random to appear in court to be available for the next case that comes up for jury selection.
If your number is called, you know you must appear in court the following day.
If you have not yet been called into a jury room by the end of the day, the jury clerk will tell you if your jury service has ended.
When you arrive in this windowless tiny room, you'll likely see at least two people wearing suits and carrying briefcases sitting at a table near the front of the room.
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.
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.
In misdemeanor cases there are sometimes fewer than twelve jurors, though in serious criminal cases twelve jurors are generally required. 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.
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. 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.
When you are called for jury duty, you get the dreaded summons in the mail commanding you to appear in court on a certain date, at a certain time. Once you check in, you're told to hurry up and wait in a big room commonly known as the jury room .
You don't often hear lawyers talk about this. If you're left on the jury panel after other jurors have been removed, you will be part of the jury that sits in judgment to decide this case.
The short answer is yes. The long answer is that jury selection is not really jury selection. The words"jury selection" give you the sense that lawyers go into a room and actually choose jurors we want on the jury. Nothing could be further from the truth. Jury selection should really be called jury de-selection.
Jury selection is nothing like that. Lawyers don't go into a room full of strangers from the community and look at a piece of paper and say "I want Jim, Jane and John. They're they best jurors here. You can have the leftovers.". It doesn't work that way.
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").
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.
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.
Venirepersons will be excused if they indicate that they will not convict in view of the sentence that might result. Such sentiments surface in drug use cases, for example, where some people feel quite strongly that personal use of illegal drugs should result in treatment, not incarceration.
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 ...
This is one reason why notorious trials are moved away from the city in which the crime allegedly occurred, in hopes that people living elsewhere may not have been exposed to such fare.
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 ...
Attorneys often ask potential jurors about their personal opinions during jury selection. Personal opinions that relate to the case can keep jurors from voting in the way one attorney wants them to vote. During a capital murder trial, the defense may not want jurors who are against the death penalty, and during a trial involving a single mom, the prosecution won’t want jurors who have traditional views on marriage and believe that mothers should always stay with their children. Personal opinions are one of the things that disqualify potential jurors because it may keep them from listening to the evidence presented and making a decision based solely on that evidence.
Any information they bring with them will taint the way they respond to the evidence and sway them towards one side before the trial even starts .
Some of the things that disqualify potential jurors include personal opinions, past history and a connection to law or law enforcement.
The jury selection process is one of the most important steps in a trial, but there are some things that disqualify potential jurors. Attorneys for both sides have the chance to ask questions and determine which individuals they want and do not want on that jury.
Personal opinions are one of the things that disqualify potential jurors because it may keep them from listening to the evidence presented and making a decision based solely on that evidence.
Knowledge of Case. Other things that disqualify potential jurors include any knowledge they might have of the case. This commonly occurs in larger cases with more publicity. A murder trial or a case involving someone famous will likely be a common story on the local news and in the newspaper.
One of the first questions that the attorney will ask if whether the juror knows anyone involved in the case. A juror who is the neighbor of a police officer testifying in the case of the child of one of the attorneys cannot serve on the juror.
All you can do is find a new attorney and file the motion for the reasons you stated . If you can prove it, you may very will get a new trial.#N#More
If you can prove that he judge knew someone was a close friend of his son, that may be grounds for a new trial. You need counsel to do this properly. Your counsel may have to have a hearing and put the juror on the stand and inquire about his relationship with the judges son. good luck.
Mr. Fox is correct. It MIGHT be grounds for a new trial or an appeal. You need to speak to an attorney, provide him with all the details (which you should NOT discuss online or with anyone else), and let the attorney advise you.