Amid Tumultuous Election Year, Jurors Are Fearful
Law.com reports that jurors are being impacted by the surprising and disconcerting series of events that have unfolded this election cycle. Meghan Kelly, of Orrick, Herrington, and Sutcliffe in New York, observes that forging consensus among jurors has become more difficult in a cultural environment that is increasingly skeptical of truth. Kelly, in addition to Christinia Marinakis, a jury consultant based in Los Angeles, report an increase in hung juries. In her words, “It’s the sense that if you’re not with us, you’re against us, and when the nation is more divided, people are less likely to want to collaborate in a jury room, even if it’s issues not related to politics.”
7th Circuit CoA Affirms No Right to Jury Trial for Revocation of Supervised Release
In United States v. Carpenter, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit found that a revocation hearing is not entitled to a jury trial under the Sixth Amendment. The challenge was brought by Seldrick Carpenter, who was serving a term of supervised release when he committed a string of crimes. Carpenter’s probation officer successfully petitioned to revoke his supervised release. The defendant then appealed the district court’s decision as violating the Sixth Amendment because his revocation was made without a jury. On appeal, the Seventh Circuit ruled that as indicated by precedent, supervised release revocations are not considered “criminal prosecutions” under the Sixth Amendment and therefore, are not afforded a jury trial right. As explained by the court, “A revocation proceeding, because it focuses on the modification of a sentence already imposed and implicates the conditional (rather than absolute) liberty . . . is not considered to be a stage of a criminal prosecution.”
Jury Unanimity Not Needed to Determine Which Gun Forms Basis for Felon In Possession of a Firearm Charge
In another case decided by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, Anthony Day challenged the district court’s denial of an instruction requiring jurors to unanimously agree on which of two weapons he possessed for the purposes of a Felon in Possession of a Firearm charge under 18 U.S.C. ยง 922(g)(1). The court rejected Day’s challenge, explaining that while the Supreme Court has interpreted the Sixth Amendment to require jury unanimity with respect to convictions for serious crimes, this requirement only applies to the elements of the offense. Further, because the particular firearm possessed is the means used to satisfy the element of ‘any firearm’ as outlined in the statute, and is not an element itself, a jury need not reach this determination unanimously.
Webinar Rescheduled for September 5, 2024
The Power or Remote Case-Specific Questionnaires | September 5 at 3:15 PM EST
Discover how remote case-specific juror questionnaires can revolutionize jury selection by providing greater convenience for prospective jurors, offering more meaningful insights into juror impartiality, and reducing operational costs through improved juror utilization.
Join us for a comprehensive webinar on September 5, 2024, from 3:15-4:30 (EST) featuring esteemed panelists from the Superior Court of Arizona, Maricopa County, as they share their successful implementation of this innovative approach. The webinar will cover:
- The process used by the Maricopa County Superior Court to prescreen jurors for bias and time conflicts;
- How remote juror questionnaires provide more detailed and valuable information to judges and lawyers;
- The practical tools utilized, including Microsoft Forms and Excel, to facilitate remote questionnaires; and
- The significant impact this approach has had on the efficiency and effectiveness of voir dire.
For more information, email Paula Hannaford-Agor.
UPCOMING WEBINAR
Using Behavioral Science to (Re)Design Your Jury Summons and Other Communications with Prospective Jurors | August 21 at 3:00 PM EST
Join us for an insightful webinar on redesigning jury summonses and other communications with prospective jurors through the lens of behavioral science. Shannon McAuliffe, associate managing director at ideas42, will guide us through behavioral science 101 and innovative strategies that courts can implement to improve response and appearance rates by prospective jurors. The session will explore:
- The principles of behavioral science and how they apply to jury communications
- Real-world examples of redesigned communications that have led to higher engagement
- Practical tips for crafting more effective messages to prospective jurors
McAuliffe will share valuable insights from her experience working with courts across the country on defendant appearance rates to implement these evidence-based approaches in the juror context.
For more information, email Paula Hannaford-Agor.
Please Submit Nominations for the 2024 Munsterman Award
The Center for Jury Studies at the National Center for State Courts is now accepting nominations for the G. Thomas Munsterman Award for Jury Innovation. The award is named for G. Thomas Munsterman, founder and former director of the Center for Jury Studies and an internationally renowned innovator in jury systems and research. The award recognizes states, local courts, individuals, or other organizations that have made significant improvements or innovations in jury procedures, operations, or practices in state or local statutes, rules, or other formal changes; jury management or technology; in-court improvements; or other improvements or innovations related to juries and jury trials. Nominations will be accepted until 5:00 pm ET on Friday, Sept. 13, 2024. Submit the name of a nominee or email Hope Forbush if you have questions about the nomination process.