jury selection

The prerequisites for the research were formed by a complex collision between the legal nature of proceedings in the jury court and the standard sanitary and epidemiological restrictions. This collision was revealed in the course of the theoretical treatment of administration of justice in the pandemic period. The primary stage of judicial proceedings involving the participation of the jury was highlighted by the authors as a subject of the research – formation of the trial jury, where the said collision appears to be especially acute. The purpose of the study was to search for possible solutions to this collision; the objective – verification of the hypothesis stating that the pandemic situation has engendered a significant modification of the procedural form of trial jury selection. To resolve this problem, the normative approach, along with the method of legal comparative studies, was used: the criminal procedure legislation and the practice of its enforcement in the Russian Fede...

The present research examines whether and how the biasing effects of the death qualification process—the unique procedure by which prospective jurors are screened for eligibility on the basis of their death penalty attitudes—have been affected by the changing landscape of opinions about capital punishment. In-depth telephone surveys were conducted with statewide representative samples of persons eligible for
jury service in three distinctly different states—California, New Hampshire, and Florida. Despite differences in geographical location, demographic make-up, and death penalty history and politics, very similar patterns of death qualification bias were observed. Persons whose death penalty attitudes “qualified” them to serve on a capital jury were more punitive overall, less well-informed about the system of death sentencing,
more willing to use aggravating factors to impose death and less willing to use mitigating factors to impose life in prison without the possibility of parole, and less racially diverse than persons who would be “excluded” by death qualification. The implications of these results are discussed, including the need for legal authorities to formally acknowledge and to effectively address these serious biasing effects.

In July 1995, the University of California Board of Regents voted to end affirmative action based on race and gender in admissions, hiring, and contracting. Recently, the Equal Opportunity Act introduced by the Republicans would abolish three decades of affirmative action programs initiated by President Johnson in 1965. Given these actions, Americans will have another opportunity to decide whether racial preferences should be terminated from all federal programs.While the question of preferential treatment of racial minorities has divided the nation and even some minority communities themselves, affirmative action in jury proceedings and trials has yet to receive much-deserved attention. This article examines public perceptions of possible application of affirmative action in criminal jury proceedings, focusing on the uses of mandatory racial quotas in criminal jury trials. We examine two different types of racially mixed juries -- the jury "de medietate linguae" and the H...

Publisher Summary The importance of trial outcomes, in combination with high uncertainty about how to diagnose individual juror biases and verdict leanings, has led attorneys to seek aid from sources ranging from professional lore, psychics, private investigators, and graphologists to modern scientific jury selection services. This chapter explicates the manner in which both scientific and nonscientific diagnostic criteria may be used to help the attorney actually seat the most desirable jury. The chapter reviews scientific jury research procedures, with emphasis on those designed to develop accurate diagnostic criteria for juror favorability. It considers how this information may be used, in combination with noninformation and misinformation, to produce the best outcome during voir dire. Scientific jury research is employed for three general purposes: to evaluate an existing jury venue or venire, to aid in selection of the trial jury, and to adjust trial strategy to fit the seated jury.

Indigenous peoples in Australia, the United States and Canada are significantly overrepresented as defendants in criminal trials and yet vastly underrepresented on juries in criminal trials. This means that all-white juries mostly determine the guilt of Indigenous defendants or white defendants responsible for harming Indigenous victims. In this article, we explore cases in which Indigenous defendants have perceived that an all-white jury’s prejudice against Indigenous people would prevent them receiving a fair trial. It focuses on Indigenous defendants (often facing charges in relation to protesting against white racism) challenging the array of all-white juries. Across these cases, Australian courts rely on formal notions of fairness in jury selection to dismiss the Indigenous defendant’s perception of bias and foreclose an inquiry into the potential prejudices of white jurors. We compare the Australian judicial ‘colour-blindness’ towards all-white juries with that of the United S...

Every week brings a new story about racialized linguistic discrimination. It happens in restaurants, on public transportation, and in the street. It also happens behind closed courtroom doors during jury selection. While it is universally recognized that dismissing prospective jurors because they look like racial minorities is prohibited, it is too often deemed acceptable to exclude jurors because they sound like racial minorities. The fact that accent discrimination is commonly racial, ethnic, and national origin discrimination is overlooked. This Article critically examines sociolinguistic scholarship to explain the relationship between accent, race, and racism. It argues that accent discrimination in jury selection violates constitutional and statutory law and focuses on Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, equal protection under the Fourteenth and Fifth Amendments, and the fair cross-section requirement of the Sixth Amendment. It situates accent discrimination within the br...

In July 1995, the University of California Board of Regents voted to end affirmative action based on race and gender in admissions, hiring, and contracting. Recently, the Equal Opportunity Act introduced by the Republicans would abolish three decades of affirmative action programs initiated by President Johnson in 1965. Given these actions, Americans will have another opportunity to decide whether racial preferences should be terminated from all federal programs.While the question of preferential treatment of racial minorities has divided the nation and even some minority communities themselves, affirmative action in jury proceedings and trials has yet to receive much-deserved attention. This article examines public perceptions of possible application of affirmative action in criminal jury proceedings, focusing on the uses of mandatory racial quotas in criminal jury trials. We examine two different types of racially mixed juries -- the jury "de medietate linguae" and the H...

In the spring of 1991, a gang of baton-wielding Los Angeles police officers savagely beat motorist Rodney King at the inter-section of Foothill Boulevard and Osborne Street.' By a quirk of fate, a bystander captured the assault on videotape and, within days, much of the nation ...

Background: Urinary tract infection (UTI) is a common syndrom in community, especially in females. The object of this study is to determine the prevalence of most common Bacteria causing UTI and Antibiogram pattern respectively in Ahwas population. Materials & methods: In this retrospective descriptive study we gathered all urine culture results from lab centers. Results: From 48850 cases, 34360 (70.34%) and 14490 (29.66%) were females and males, respectively. The most frequent pathogens were E.coli (46.29%), S.saprophyticus (25.8%) and Klebsiella ...

In our representative democracy we guarantee equal participation for all, but we fall short of this promise in so many domains of our civic life. From the schoolhouse, to the jailhouse, to the courthouse, racial minorities are underrepresented among key public decision-makers, such as judges, police officers, and teachers. This gap between our aspirations for representative democracy and the reality that our judges, police officers, and teachers are often woefully under-representative of the racially diverse communities they serve leaves many citizens of color wanting for the democratic guarantee of equal participation. This critical failure of our democracy threatens to undermine the legitimacy of these important civic institutions. It deepens mistrust between minority communities and the justice system and exacerbates the failures of a public education system already lacking accountability to minority students. But there is hope for rebuilding the trust, accountability and legitim...

Recent state and federal decisions significantly influenced Texas criminal procedure at both the trial and appellate levels. These decisions generally affected three main areas of the punishment stage of Texas criminal trials. First, they defined the scope of evidence admissible at the punishment stage. Second, they addressed procedural and substantive questions concerning the special punishment issue of use or exhibition of a deadly weapon. Third, they raised substantial questions about the constitutionality of the death penalty as applied by Texas courts.

Texas courts also faced numerous challenges in the aftermath of several important state and federal constitutional decisions. These decisions involved issues of procedural default, retroactivity, and harmless error, which prompted reconsideration of the availability of, and procedural requirements for, habeas corpus. For example, Texas courts have devised various procedures in implementing Batson v. Kentucky, which established new standards to prevent racial discrimination in the selection of juries. These cases helped develop Texas trial court and appellate review.

There are three related concerns about U.S. federal trial courts.  The first is the bureaucratic tendencies of federal courts in general and in trial courts particularly.  The second is related to and derived from bureaucracy: the changing trial scene itself.  The third is the continuing attractiveness of federal courts as problem solvers.

There now seems to be not only a greater toleration but a virtual expectation that Article III judges will delegate, and delegate as much as possible.  However, the task of judging is personal and can only be done with hands-on effort.  Further, changes to trial procedures, like reducing jury sizes and selection process, in the name of cost and time efficiency, have the potential to compromise the ability of the courts to produce equitable results.  Finally, the response to the increasing caseloads of the federal courts inevitably triggers a demand for more judges, but the numbers of the federal judges should be the last, not the first, response to problems of workload.  Increased numbers dilute the currency of federal judgeships and significantly reduce their attractiveness, inexorably limiting the applicant pool.

It is difficult to quarrel with the assumption that an efficient model is more likely to produce just results than a relatively inefficient one—at least until one begins to probe its translation in our trial courts.  Our push for greater efficiency, and its premise of a higher quality of justice, can produce perverse consequences, and it is important that trial lawyers understand what is on the table and open for change.