A further wrinkle on civic participation is that some people fail to register to vote solely in order to avoid jury service; however, this is less likely to be successful given the expanded source lists used to develop jury pools.
Reforms have sought to address these and other problems so as to promote a more positive image of jury service and encourage more widespread participation. Some states, including New York in , have adopted legislation that increases juror compensation and reduces the likelihood of jury sequestration.
New York also eliminated many automatic exemptions, thereby seeking to reduce the burdens and increase the experience of service among a much wider number and range of people New York City Mayor Rudolph Guliani recently served as foreperson of a jury in a civil case.
Valerie P. James J. Hall, ed. Paula L. Hannaford and G. Lynn Hazelwood and John C. Robert G. American Bar Association, Perceptions of the U. It offers U. In Duncan v. Louisiana , the landmark U. Over time, the Supreme Court has helped to ensure that the jury is both fair and representative by outlawing the practice of excluding nonwhites and women from jury service, limiting the powers of lawyers to exclude individuals from juries during the process of voir dire, and expanding the safeguards against outside influences on the jury.
By looking at the administration of justice before the advent ot the jury system, the early history of juries, and the evolution of the modern jury in the United States, one sees the key role of the jury in ensuring fairness and public confidence in the justice system. In the 12th and 13th centuries, civil and criminal disputes were commonly settled by battles or ordeals for example, requiring the accused to dip his hand in boiling water to see if it became infected under the assumption that God would intervene on behalf of the right or innocent party.
The inherent conflict in these two roles encouraged the English Parliament in to pass a statute allowing jurors ruling on guilt versus innocence to be excluded if they had presented evidence. Eventually, as witnesses were brought in to testify, jurors were not expected to know the facts of the case, but rather, to determine them. In colonial America, the jury became a vehicle for the colonists to assert new ideas and principles, particularly in cases of conflict with the Crown.
In that case, the jury was asked only to determine whether Zenger had in fact printed the newspaper in question; a judge sympathetic to the king would then decide whether he was guilty of sedition. In the following decades, the role of the jury and the jury selection process came to the forefront of public discussion, and several states passed legislation dealing with jury selection in order to thwart British attempts to stack juries with loyalists.
After the American Revolution, juries were seen as having even greater importance. The execution of the laws is more important than the making of them. There are two forms of the modern jury, each with a distinct purpose. The grand jury assesses evidence in criminal cases and issues a decision as to whether the prosecution may indict an individual, while the petit trial jury decides guilt in criminal cases or liability and monetary damages in civil cases.
The grand jury does not exist in every state; in fact, only 14 states require grand juries to issue indictments for all criminal prosecutions.
Grand juries listen to evidence for criminal cases only. They are composed of between 6 and 23 jurors, hence the name grand from the French, and serve for a period of time often several months , potentially hearing many cases. In many states a two-thirds or three-fourths majority is required, while in some states as few as 12 of 23 jurors may prosecute.
If the jurors cannot agree on a verdict, a hung jury occurs and a new trial may be held or the case dismissed. The only people ineligible to serve on juries are the mentally ill and noncitizens. In many states, however, individuals with jobs deemed important to society teachers or doctors, for example , those whose jobs would be put in jeopardy by a long absence small business owners, for example , and non-English speakers are excused from jury service, either by statute or practice.
In the U. Both defense and prosecution can dismiss jurors for cause by establishing some reason why the juror might be prejudiced. The jurors elect a foreperson or presiding juror from among them to lead deliberations and announce their verdict, and the court provides the jury with written forms of all possible verdicts for the case.
Juries generally decide criminal sentences only in death penalty cases. After the verdict is given, the jurors are paid a daily stipend for their service and dismissed. Though today juries are used in only about 5 percent of all criminal and civil cases, they are as fundamental to justice in the United States now as when Andrew Hamilton argued for an expanded role of the jury in A jury that includes African Americans will presumably be better able to understand the circumstances of an African American defendant who claims to have been targeted by police, just as a jury that includes women will likely be better able to understand the experience of a woman charged with assault against an abusive husband.
Juries also enable Americans to maintain an active role in their government. Jury service gives individuals first-hand experience with the legal system, which in turn helps generate support for it.
Strauder v. West Virginia , U. Sheppard v. Maxwell , U. The case of Sam Sheppard, a Cleveland doctor accused of killing his wife, received such widespread pre-trial publicity excoriating Sheppard and proclaiming his guilt that the Court found he did not receive a fair trial and overturned his conviction.
Duncan v. Louisiana , U. He had been given a day prison sentence for a misdemeanor battery charge without the benefit of a jury trial because the Louisiana Constitution required juries only in capital cases or cases in which imprisonment or hard labor could be imposed.
Johnson v. Oregon , U. Taylor v. Batson v. Kentucky , U. The Court pronounced peremptory challenges based solely on race to be unconstitutional. In this case against an African American man charged with burglary and receipt of stolen goods, all four black potential jurors were dismissed by the prosecution, and Batson was found guilty.
The Supreme Court ruled that this was a violation of his Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights to a jury drawn from a cross-section of the community and equal protection of the law. Lockhart v. McCree , U. Interview a parent or some other adult who was called for jury service. Did this person: Serve on a jury?
Get dismissed? Ask the person to describe either experience. If the person served: For how long? In what kind of case? What was surprising about the procedures? What did this person learn?
As a juror, you have a personal responsibility, both to the person on trial and to the community, to ensure that justice is done. Normal court hours are 10 a. Jurors should assemble punctually shortly before 10 a. Usually the jurors themselves are required to select one of their members as foreman. The trial judge will indicate when this should be done.
The judge should be informed after the selection has been made. If you have any personal difficulty during the trial, raise the matter through the foreman in open court by way of a question directed to the judge. Routine queries, such as the situation of court facilities, should be directed to the court usher. As a juror, you should not otherwise enter into conversation with the court usher. Nor should you speak with counsel, witnesses or other persons connected with the trial during the course of the trial.
During the course of the trial, you must not discuss any matters arising out of the trial with your family, friends or any other persons except your fellow jurors and even then only within the privacy of the jury room. If you find difficulty in hearing the evidence or in following it, bring the matter immediately to the attention of the trial judge.
The jury may be asked to retire while the court considers submissions by counsel. This is quite usual during a criminal trial and you and your fellow members of the jury should not attach any significance to it. The matters raised during such applications are questions of law, which are properly determined by the judge in the absence of the jury.
You may take notes during the trial if you wish. However, your main duty is to listen and observe. Listen to everything that is said and observe the witnesses carefully. Remember that at the end of the trial, both counsel and the trial judge will draw your attention to what appear to them to be the significant parts of the evidence.
After the judge has summed up, the jury is placed in charge of the court usher. It then retires to consider its verdict. When the jury retires, it must remain apart until a verdict has been agreed upon or it is discharged by the court. After the prosecutor rests, no more witnesses can be called to the stand or evidence introduced by the government. After the Government rests, the defense has the opportunity to present witnesses and evidence to the jury.
The defense also has the option of not having the defendant testify. There is no burden upon the defendant to prove that they are innocent. It is the government's responsibility to prove the defendant committed the crime as detailed in the indictment. The fact that a defendant did not testify may not be considered by the jury as proof that the defendant committed the crime.
The defense may also waive his case. If the defense does not put on any evidence, the jury cannot assume that the defendant is guilty simply because they did not put on a defense. The decision to put on a defense is solely up to the defendant and the defense attorney. However, the defense will usually present its own version of the case.
Objections During direct or cross examination, either attorney can make an objection to a question or a piece of evidence to the judge. For example, a prosecutor or defense attorney may object to the wide range of the direct examination because it is beyond the knowledge of the witness, the attorney may be arguing with the witness rather than asking questions, or the witness may be talking about things irrelevant to the case.
The judge decides the outcome of an objection, sometimes after allowing attorneys on both sides to comment before making a ruling. Closing arguments are the final opportunity for the prosecutor and the defense attorney to talk to the jury.
These arguments allow both attorneys to summarize the testimony and evidence, and ask the jury to return a verdict of guilty or not guilty. After being charged, the jury goes into deliberation, the process of deciding whether a defendant is guilty or not guilty.
During this process, no one associated with the trial can contact the jury without the judges and lawyers. If the jury has a question on the law, they must write a note to the judge, which the judge will read in court with all parties present.
0コメント