RIGHT TO JURY TRIAL Flashcards
when is Δ entitled to jury trial?
6+ month sentence (Duncan v. LA)
right to waive jury trial; state’s refusal
state allowed to emplower prosecutor to refuse Δ’s right to waive jury trial
jury size: constitutuional requirements
no right to 12-person jury (Williams v. FL) but below 6 unconstitutional (Ballew)
6-person jury minimum requirement rationales
risk of error; conviction rates; probability of wrongfully acquitting guilty Δ & wrongfully convicting innocent Δ, etc. = higher with smaller juries
unanimous verdict required?
yes, 6th Amendment requires unanimous jury verdict to convict Δ (Ramos)–does not apply retroactively
when may juror be excluded for cause? (2 circumstances)
1) statutorily unqualified to serve (e.g., not citizen, doesn’t speak English, pending criminal charges, etc.) or 2) bias
2 types of juror bias
1) actual bias (demonstrated during voir doir) & 2) presumed bias (legally presumed to exist)
peremptory challenges: definition & limitations
when prosecutor or Δ unsuccessful in convincing judge to remove juror for cause, may exercise one of their peremptory challenges to remove juror without stating reasons; limitations = # of challenges trial limited by statute or rule
Batson v. Kentucky rule
state can’t use peremptory challenge to exclude juror based solely on race; has since been extend to include defense peremptory challenges; peremptory challenges based solely on gender; civil trials, & Δ not same race as juror)
Batson challenge: overview
if trial court decides facts establish prima facie case of purposeful discrimination & prosecutor can’t provide race-neutral explanation for challenge, conviction can be reversed
Batson challenge analysis: 3 steps
1) opponent of peremptory challenge establishes prima facie case of racial discrimination; 2) burden shifts to other party to provide neutral explanation; 3) if neutral explanation provided, court decides whether opponent of peremptory challenge has proven purposeful facial discrimination
Batson challenge: some notes/caveats
opponent of peremptory challenge satifies step 1 of process by producing evidence sufficient to permit trial judge to draw inference that discrimination occurred; step 2 of the process doesn’t demand a persuasive or even plausible explanation & unless a discriminatory intent is inherent in the explanation, the reason will be deemed neutral
Batson challenge techniques to show explanation isn’t neutral
juror of different race asked different questions, juror of different race has same qualities of excluded juror that prosecutor gave as reasoning
Batson v. Kentucky rule
state can’t use peremptory challenge to exclude juror based solely on race; has since been extend to include defense peremptory challenges; peremptory challenges based solely on gender; civil trials, & Δ not same race as juror)
Batson challenge: overview
if trial court decides facts establish prima facie case of purposeful discrimination & prosecutor can’t provide race-neutral explanation for challenge, conviction can be reversed
