Week6_jury

Week 6: Juries

Course Information:Professor: SalamCourse: POLI104C - Civil Liberties: Rights of the Accused & MinoritiesDate: February 12, 2025

Agenda

• Exam Grades:

  • Average score around 17.7, indicating areas of strength and topics requiring more attention in future reviews.

• Office Hours:

  • Tomorrow from 12-2 PM on Zoom for any questions about course materials, exam preparation, or individual concerns regarding the subject matter.

Topics Covered:

• In-depth review of the Sixth Amendment, focusing on its implications for the rights of the accused.

• Discussed the political economy work related to the functioning and structure of juries within the judicial system.

• Analyzed the jury selection process and the landmark Batson decision, which addresses racial discrimination in jury selection.

Sixth Amendment Overview

• Rights of the Accused:

  • Right to a speedy and public trial: Ensures trials occur without unnecessary delays, promoting fairness.

  • Right to an impartial jury: Guarantees that jurors are unbiased and serve as a fair representation of the community.

  • Right to be informed of the accusations: Ensures defendants understand the nature and cause of the accusations against them.

  • Right to confront witnesses: Allows the accused to challenge the evidence presented against them personally.

  • Right to compulsory process for obtaining witnesses: Enables defendants to summon witnesses on their behalf.

  • Right to Assistance of Counsel for defense: Guarantees the right to an attorney during legal proceedings.

Origin of the Right to Jury Trials

• Historical Context:

  • Jury trials are deeply rooted in English common law, evolving over centuries.

  • Magna Carta (1215): Established the critical role of trial by a jury of peers—a crucial safeguard against governmental overreach.

  • Quote: "No free man shall be seized, imprisoned, disseised, outlawed, or exiled, or in any way destroyed, except by the lawful judgment of his equals or by the law of the land."

  • Juries serve as a check against government power, a principle demonstrated in the historical trial of William Penn, where jurors refused to convict him under the pressures of authority.

  • This tradition of jury trials was carried over to the American colonies and later enshrined in the Bill of Rights.

Indictment vs. Trial

• Focus on Criminal Jury Trials:

  • Involves a jury of citizens determining the guilt or innocence of a defendant based on evidence presented.

  • Distinction from grand jury indictment (referenced in the Fifth Amendment), which solely assesses whether there is sufficient evidence to proceed with a trial.

• Seventh Amendment:

  • Protects the right to a jury trial in civil cases, thereby ensuring juries play a critical role in both criminal and civil justice systems.

Jury Trials in the U.S.

• Uncertainties Surrounding Jury Trials:

  • Who qualifies to serve on a jury? Various factors like age, residency, and legal competencies are considered.

  • What voting methods should juries use? The debate includes majority vs. unanimous voting structures.

  • How many jurors are necessary? States have historically defined different requirements for the size of juries, ranging from less than 12 to 12 jurors.

  • What are the jurors' roles? Extensive expectations of jurors include impartiality, attentive listening, and fair deliberation leading to a verdict.

Goals of Juries

• Primary Function:

  • Introduce and evaluate evidence presented during the trial, aiming to deliver a fair and just verdict.

  • Jurors are tasked with aggregating and assessing information to arrive at an accurate outcome, seeking to convict the guilty while acquitting the innocent.

Political Economy Work on Juries

• Collective Decision-Making in Juries:

  • Exploration of how juries aggregate information and the decision-making dynamics involved.

  • Condorcet Jury Theorem: suggests that larger electorates voting under majority rule have better chances of achieving correct decisions when individual probabilities of correctness exceed 50%.

Unanimous Rule in Juries

• Challenges of Unanimous Decision-Making:

  • Research by Feddersen & Pesendorfer (1998) indicates that errors can be more common under unanimous rule compared to majority rule, especially in larger juries.

  • Group Dynamics: Peer pressure can influence jurors to conform to majority opinions, potentially obscuring true justice.

  • Coughlan (2000): Suggests that deliberation techniques such as straw polls could effectively reduce wrongful verdicts.

Unanimous vs. Majority Rule

• Debate around Jury Rules:

  • Unanimous jury rules are historically seen as stricter standards for prosecution, with state discretion varying on voting rules.

  • Key Cases:

    • Williams v. Florida (1970): Allowed for 6-person juries, sparking discussions on jury size.

    • Apodaca v. Oregon (1972): Court upheld convictions based on 10 out of 12 jurors voting for guilt in non-capital cases.

    • Burch v. Louisiana (1979): Affirmed that 6-person juries cannot return non-unanimous verdicts.

    • Ramos v. Louisiana (2020): Reinforced the necessity for unanimous verdicts in state convictions, which has critical implications for Black defendants.

Jury Service Eligibility

• Requirements to Serve:

  • U.S. citizens over the age of 18, residents within the jurisdiction where the trial takes place, and individuals must demonstrate English fluency and intellectual competency form the initial jury pool.

Jury Selection Process

• Overview:

  • Voir Dire: The process by which attorneys question potential jurors to gauge their backgrounds, biases, and potential conflicts of interest.

  • Challenge Types:

    • Strikes for Cause: An unlimited number can be employed if specific valid reasons are presented (e.g., clear conflicts of interest).

    • Peremptory Strikes: A limited number of strikes are permitted without requiring any justification, raising concerns about their impact on trial outcomes.

Batson v. Kentucky (1986)

• Case Background:

  • Centers on a Black man charged with burglary whose prosecution dismissed all Black jurors using peremptory strikes.

  • The defense argued these dismissals were racially motivated, leading to an eventual Supreme Court ruling that deemed race-based juror removal unconstitutional, emphasizing the need for diversity in juries.

Batson Challenges in California

• Following the Batson ruling, challenges to the removal of jurors based on race necessitate that prosecutors provide a race-neutral justification for their strikes, promoting fair representation.

Flanagan (2018) Study Overview

• Research Study on Jury Dynamics:

  • Analyzed jury composition and verdict outcomes in data from felony trials in North Carolina (2010-2012).

  • Findings revealed a systemic racial bias against Black jurors, significantly impacting verdicts involving Black defendants, calling into question the equity of jury processes.

Discussion Points

• Justice Marshall's concurring opinion in Batson: Proposes eliminating peremptory strikes altogether to eliminate racial bias.

• Explores concerns about the fairness of peremptory strikes and their profound impact on trial equity.

• Engages with questions on the potential effects of eliminating peremptory strikes and their relationships to trial fairness and voting rules within jury systems.