Search

The Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees criminal defendants "the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury of the State." Voir dire, the procedure during which the prosecution and the defense may challenge prospective jurors for cause or exercise peremptory challenges, purports to uphold this right. When the prosecution has access to cellular geolocation data on prospective jurors that the defense lacks, however, it may jeopardize the defendant's Sixth Amendment rights. This Note proposes a solution to that problem in the form of an addition to Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. By amending Rule 16 to specifically compel government disclosure of prospective jurors' cell site location information (CSLI) to the defense, the criminal defendant's Sixth Amendment right to an impartial jury is significantly more likely to be protected. Moreover, this addition to Rule 16 would guide courts' adaptation to technological advances, as well as restore the information equilibrium between criminal defendants and the government. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The peremptory challenge is one of the oldest and most well-established jury selection procedures. Its use dates back to the earliest days of English common law, and it was a firmly established and protected practice at the United States' founding and into the early twentieth century. But while peremptory challenges are foundational, they remain perhaps the most controversial aspect of jury selection today. This is because they are regularly used by the government and private parties to advance racist, sexist, and bigoted ends. For this reason, over the last three decades, calls to abolish the practice have been regularly made by U.S. Supreme Court Justices and law students alike. And in 2022, Arizona became the first state in U.S. history to take that dramatic step--eliminating peremptory challenges in all cases. This Article is the first to demonstrate that abolition of peremptory challenges is unconstitutional. Despite some contrary Supreme Court precedent, it contends that the early history, practice, and texts show that the Sixth Amendment secures to criminal defendants, particularly in capital cases, the right to participate in jury selection through peremptory challenges. Whether the Seventh Amendment secures an analogous right to civil litigants is less clear, though there is a strong argument that it should be so read. Crucially, constitutionalizing the right does not mean that peremptories may escape all regulation. The Fourteenth Amendment imposes limitations, and legislatures may make further appropriate restrictions. The Article concludes by reviewing paths for balancing the right to peremptory challenges with the need to eradicate systemic bias from jury selection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A report entitled Say Her Name: Resisting Police Brutality against Black Women underscores the paucity of research examining police violence toward Black women. This study focused on how valuing a White police officer and symbolic racism moderate reactions when the officer fatally shoots a Black or White woman during a traffic stop. At high levels of officer valuing, symbolic racism was positively associated with perceptions the victim presented a threat to the officer, but negatively associated with support for punishing the officer and perceived victim compliance; these associations were stronger when the victim was Black relative to White. At low officer valuing levels, there was no variability in the link between symbolic racism and the outcome variables as a function of victim race. Implications for bias in judicial outcomes for the victim and officer are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Award ceremonies value and highlight the best pieces of communication, reflecting the innovative trends of advertising practice, and are also on the rise as places for meeting and exchanging experiences, points of reflection on the challenges facing the industry and events to showcase the high value of the industry. The aim of this study is to evaluate the methodology of advertising festivals and identify the criteria for their operation. A content analysis of the official websites of 85 international award ceremonies with 20 indicators was carried out. The results show the non-specialized, general nature of most of the annual events. Five major award category types are identified: media and actions, digital, differential feature of the endeavour, resources used and results obtained. The jury selection criteria are only made public for one in ten award ceremonies, while the criteria for the assessment of the pieces are not known for 40% of the award ceremonies. This study has theoretical–practical implications, and expands upon previous knowledge regarding award, the selection of people and pieces, and the criteria for both. It concludes by underlining transparency as a potential area for improvement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Film festivals are an added value to the film industry. The research of these events is growing, although it is limited in terms of jury committees, and less so in terms of gender bias. The initial assumption is that if juries are mainly made up of men, awards will be given mainly to men. In the context of Spain, this process is related to the fact that the most prominent jobs in the film process are still held by men (Arranz et al., 2007). This paper discusses the composition of the juries and the awards given at animation film festivals in Spain in 2022, as an approach to the study of juries from a gender perspective. The first results show that awards are predominantly given to men (65%), despite the fact that the juries are made up mostly of women (60.42%). This shows an imbalance: Although there is more female presence on the juries, the majority of the awards continue to be given to men. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

United States law bars using peremptory strikes during jury selection because of prospective juror race, ethnicity, sex, or membership in certain other cognizable classes. Here, we extend a Bayesian approach for detecting such illegal strike bias by showing how to incorporate historical data on an attorney's use of peremptory strikes in past cases. In so doing, we use the power prior to adjust the weight of such historical information in the analysis. Using simulations, we show how the choice of the power prior's discounting parameter influences bias detection (how likely the credible interval for the bias parameter excludes zero), depending on the degree of incompatibility between current and historical trial data. Finally, we extend this approach with a prototype software application that lawyers could use to detect strike bias in real time during jury-selection. We illustrate this application's use with real historical strike data from a convenience sample of cases from one court. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the rule changes approved by the Supreme Court of Missouri in March 2024 regarding the absence of witnesses and the collection of race and ethnicity data under the National Center for State Courts' National Open Court Data Standards and Court Operating Rule 4.07.1. Other topics include the recommended explanatory instruction before jury selection on civil cases.

The article focuses on the ineffectiveness of the Batson challenge in addressing racial discrimination in jury selection, particularly within the context of Texas, U.S. It examines the flaws in the current legal test for proving racial bias in jury selection, the implications of these flaws, and the challenges faced by defendants in litigating Batson claims. It explores potential solutions to address these issues, including proposed reforms and recent responses from different states.

Many studies have employed regression analysis with data drawn from court opinions. For example, an analyst might use regression analysis to determine the factors that explain the size of damages awards or the factors that determine the probability that the plaintiff will prevail at trial or on appeal. However, the full potential of multiple regression analysis in legal research has not been realized, largely because of the sample selection problem. We propose a method for controlling for sample selection bias using data from court opinions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Peremptory challenges in jury selection are being used in a biased and discriminatory manner. The Batson v. Kentucky safeguards are not working as intended and have not resolved the problem of jury bias. States now need to decide: will they follow Arizona's bold lead in 2022 and abolish peremptory challenges, or will they follow Washington and try to improve on Batson? This Article presents a compelling argument for abolishing peremptory strikes in jury selections. The authors trace the historical development of peremptory challenges, highlighting their evolution from a mechanism to ensure impartiality to their current use in shaping a biased jury. After examining Washington's "neutral observer" standard and Arizona's complete elimination of peremptory challenges, the authors advocate for a shift to the English model--where "the first twelve in the box" become jurors. The Article includes a helpful chart showing the direction in which key states are leaning. It raises thought-provoking questions about implicit bias, the limitations of current methods, and the advantages of a simplified approach to jury selection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article delves into the role of race in jury selection in the U.S. and the ongoing efforts to reform the system to ensure fairness. It examines various aspects of the jury selection process, including the use of peremptory strikes and the role of judges in overseeing voir dire. It analyzes how different approaches to jury selection can impact the diversity and impartiality of juries.

The article explores the issue of race-based peremptory challenges in jury selection and the efforts of several states, including Washington, California, and Arizona, to address this problem. It discusses the limitations of the Batson test and examines the different approaches taken by these states to eliminate discriminatory peremptory challenges, either through rule changes, legislation, or complete elimination of peremptory challenges.

The article focuses on the importance of jury selection procedures, particularly through the lens of voir dire. It discusses the impact of careful voir dire on cases, the effectiveness of open-ended questioning, individual questioning, and the challenges faced in diversifying jury pools. It further sheds light on the significance of thorough jury selection processes in ensuring fair trials.

This document is a transcript of a symposium presentation by attorney Ibiere Seck and Judge Kevin Brazile. Seck discusses the importance of telling the stories of those who have suffered human harms and losses, while also considering the personal experiences and biases of jurors. Judge Brazile emphasizes the value of learning from both wins and losses as a trial lawyer and encourages future lawyers to gain real experience in trying cases. The document provides tips on jury selection and trial preparation, including the use of jury questionnaires, mini openings, effective voir dire, jury consultants, and engaging presentation techniques such as PowerPoint, timelines, and video recordings. It concludes by highlighting the significance of preparation and teamwork in achieving success in the courtroom. [Extracted from the article]

Black defendants are executed at a disproportionately high rate, an injustice quietly persisting in the shadow of America's dark history of slavery and Jim Crow. While a variety of intersectional factors have perpetuated this injustice, the role of prosecutors who commit misconduct to secure a conviction is significant. Defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty, but when the prosecutors who carry the burden of proving that guilt choose not to play by the rules, they wantonly and recklessly embrace the risk of convicting-even killing-an innocent person. This Comment focuses on two primary forms of prosecutor misconduct: Batson violations that occur during jury selection when a prosecutor uses his or her peremptory strikes in a racially discriminatory manner, and Brady violations that occur when the prosecution suppresses materially exculpatory evidence. from the defense. While the Supreme Court has established Fourteenth Amendment safeguards to protect criminal defendants from these forms of misconduct, this Comment argues that those safeguards are incomplete. Fourteenth Amendment jurisprudence fails adequately both to deter prosecutorial misconduct and to guarantee that criminal defendants receive a fair trial. These failures are only amp lifted for Black capital defendants, who experience disproportionally higher rates of prosecutor misconduct and capital sentencing. Seeking to better deter incidents of prosecutor misconduct and better ensure Black capital defendants receive due process of law, this Comment proposes a four-part Model Act. Inspired by the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 and the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, this Act (1) creates a state commission for prosecutor misconduct, (2) charges the commission with the role of drafting advisory guidelines for classifying prosecutor misconduct, (3) mandates that the commission consider the guidelines prior to imposing sanctions on prosecutors found to have committed misconduct. and (4) mandates that state judges consider the guidelines prior to imposing remedies for cases affected by misconduct. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Numerous studies have demonstrated that female and Black jurors are under‐represented on juries in criminal cases, especially so when the prosecution seeks the death penalty. The primary, but not exclusive, way in which this happens is that prosecutors remove them from the jury pool through the exercise of peremptory challenges. The practice remains widespread despite the Supreme Court's decision more than 30 years ago holding that using such challenges in a racially (or gender based) discriminatory manner violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. In the years since, enforcement by the Supreme Court and state and federal courts has been uneven. However, in several recent cases, in finding that prosecutors struck Black venire persons because of their race, the Supreme Court relied in part on evidence that the prosecution questioned Black and White venire persons differently. The legal term of art for this practice is "disparate questioning." [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In her book The Power of the Jury: Transforming Citizens into Jurors, Professor Nancy Marder describes how the trial process, beginning with the jury summons and ending with a post-verdict meeting with the judge, transforms citizens into jurors and then back into more fully engaged citizens. In each chapter, Marder offers suggestions for making the process more effective so that jurors are better prepared to fulfill their role in the American justice system. In some instances, Marder’s suggestions elevate the transformation from citizens to jurors over the actual task that jurors exist to perform—namely, to use their collective wisdom and community values to decide cases fairly and impartially. Overall, however, The Power of the Jury provides valuable insights into how citizens can be transformed into effective jurors and how this transformation can impact the legal system in the United States and society as a whole. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Criminal defendants have a 6th Amendment right to an impartial jury, but customary methods of jury selection often fail to uncover deeply held juror attitudes. Addressing the death penalty as a polarizing issue, the Juror Questionnaire of Values and Viewpoints (JQVV) was validated and cross-validated with two separate MTurk studies of capital jury-eligible adults. With complete anonymity assured by MTurk, Study 1 assessed death-penalty attitudes for 354 juror-eligible participants and their likelihood of mispresenting their views during voir dire. Validity of the JQVV was assessed with the Pretrial Juror Attitude Questionnaire (PJAQ) and predicted differences for Support-Death and Support-Life group. Study 2, with an entirely new sample of 313 juror-eligible adults, cross-validated the JQVV and tested the effects of positive impression management (PIM). Importantly, Support-Death mostly expressed their candid views even with the PIM condition. Although Support-Life frequently denied their death-penalty views, the JQVV Prosecution-Cynicism (Pro-Cyn) scale proved moderately effective at identifying their denials. Professional implications for capital jury selection are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

High-profile jury trials have catapulted concerns about jury fairness to the center of public consciousness. The public demands--and deserves--fairness from its juries. Despite the jury's sound performance in most cases, we can do better. The groundwork for the jury's capacity for fairness is laid long before prospective jurors enter the courtroom. It is further shaped by processes that occur during jury selection, throughout the trial, and in the course of jury deliberations. Most of these influences are not immediately visible to the public. In this Article, we provide a comprehensive examination of the phases of the jury trial that are critical to achieving fair juries. We describe how problems at each stage of the jury trial can undermine performance and we propose a set of important empirically-grounded reforms that will strengthen jury selection and trial procedures, optimizing fair juries now and into the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]