LAW DAY 2005LAW DAY 2005Presented byPresented by

ADA Bill FilmoreADA Bill Filmore

What is Law Day?What is Law Day?

Began in 1958Began in 1958 Law Day, May 1, is a national day of Law Day, May 1, is a national day of

celebration, where we traditionally honor celebration, where we traditionally honor our freedoms as Americans – freedoms our freedoms as Americans – freedoms protected by our laws and legal protected by our laws and legal institutionsinstitutions

The legal profession has played a major The legal profession has played a major role in ensuring that the rule of law role in ensuring that the rule of law remains strong in our nation, that it remains strong in our nation, that it pursues justice and defends liberty. pursues justice and defends liberty.

Beginning of Law DayBeginning of Law Day

1957 vision of 1957 vision of Washington D.C. Washington D.C. attorney Charles S. attorney Charles S. Rhyne serving as Rhyne serving as ABA PresidentABA President

Proclamation by Proclamation by President President Eisenhower on Feb. Eisenhower on Feb. 3, 19583, 1958

Proclamation 1Proclamation 1stst Paragraph Paragraph

WHEREAS, it is fitting that the people WHEREAS, it is fitting that the people of this Nation should remember with of this Nation should remember with pride and vigilantly guard the great pride and vigilantly guard the great heritage of liberty, justice and heritage of liberty, justice and equality under law which our equality under law which our forefathers bequeathed to us; forefathers bequeathed to us; and . . .and . . .

Congressional Resolution Congressional Resolution Establishing Law Day (1961)Establishing Law Day (1961)

US Code, Title 36, Section 164US Code, Title 36, Section 164

The first day of May of each year is hereby designated as The first day of May of each year is hereby designated as Law Day, U.S.A. It is set aside as a special day of Law Day, U.S.A. It is set aside as a special day of celebration by the American people in appreciation of their celebration by the American people in appreciation of their liberties and the reaffirmation of their loyalty to the United liberties and the reaffirmation of their loyalty to the United States of America; of their rededication to the ideals of States of America; of their rededication to the ideals of equality and justice under law in their relations with each equality and justice under law in their relations with each other as well as with other nations; and for the cultivation other as well as with other nations; and for the cultivation of that respect for law that is so vital to the democratic of that respect for law that is so vital to the democratic way of life. way of life.

The President of the United States is authorized and The President of the United States is authorized and requested to issue a proclamation calling upon all public requested to issue a proclamation calling upon all public officials to display the flag of the United States on all officials to display the flag of the United States on all government buildings on such day and inviting the people government buildings on such day and inviting the people of the United States to observe such day with suitable of the United States to observe such day with suitable ceremonies and other appropriate ways, through public ceremonies and other appropriate ways, through public bodies and private organizations as well as in schools and bodies and private organizations as well as in schools and other suitable places. other suitable places.

LAW DAY THEMESLAW DAY THEMES

Since 1974 themes have Since 1974 themes have be established for Law be established for Law DayDay

The themes since 1997 The themes since 1997 have been entitled have been entitled “Celebrate Your “Celebrate Your Freedom”Freedom”

Law Day Individual ThemesLaw Day Individual Themes

1997 Celebrate Your Freedom: First Amendment 1997 Celebrate Your Freedom: First Amendment Freedoms Freedoms

1998 Celebrate Your Freedom: Due Process 1998 Celebrate Your Freedom: Due Process Guarantees Guarantees

1999 Celebrate Your Freedom: The Quest for Equality 1999 Celebrate Your Freedom: The Quest for Equality 2000 Celebrate Your Freedom: Speak Up for 2000 Celebrate Your Freedom: Speak Up for

Democracy and Diversity Democracy and Diversity 2001 Celebrate Your Freedom: Protecting the Best 2001 Celebrate Your Freedom: Protecting the Best

Interests of Our Children Interests of Our Children 2002 Celebrate Your Freedom: Assuring Equal Justice 2002 Celebrate Your Freedom: Assuring Equal Justice

for Allfor All 2003 Celebrate Your Freedom: Independent Courts 2003 Celebrate Your Freedom: Independent Courts

Protect Our Liberties Protect Our Liberties

Then the Themes changed…Then the Themes changed…

In 2004 the Theme was…In 2004 the Theme was…

To Win Equality by Law: To Win Equality by Law: Brown vs. Board of Brown vs. Board of EducationEducation

For 2005,For 2005, the Theme is… the Theme is…

TheThe

American American JuryJury

We the People in ActionWe the People in Action

Jury and DemocracyJury and Democracy

The jury is the embodiment of democracyThe jury is the embodiment of democracy We entrust or juries with decision that We entrust or juries with decision that

involve the liberties and property of involve the liberties and property of defendantsdefendants

In doing so, we confirm our faith in the ability In doing so, we confirm our faith in the ability of people to make just and wise decisions, of people to make just and wise decisions, and the is the definition of democracyand the is the definition of democracy

The jury system is also an opportunity to The jury system is also an opportunity to educate Americans in law, legal processes, educate Americans in law, legal processes, and decision making in a democracy and decision making in a democracy

Origins – Henry IIOrigins – Henry II The American Jury system has it origins in The American Jury system has it origins in

medieval Englandmedieval England Jury owes a special debt to legal Jury owes a special debt to legal

innovations of King Henry II (1154-1189)innovations of King Henry II (1154-1189) Henry created new legal actions to Henry created new legal actions to

resolve disputes over land and resolve disputes over land and inheritancesinheritances

Personally interested in government and Personally interested in government and law, Henry made use of juries and re-law, Henry made use of juries and re-introduced the sending of justices introduced the sending of justices (judges) on regular tours of the country to (judges) on regular tours of the country to try cases for the Crown. try cases for the Crown.

Used a panel of 12 men which formed Used a panel of 12 men which formed basis of our modern legal systembasis of our modern legal system

Big difference, these 12 were to have Big difference, these 12 were to have knowledge of the facts knowledge of the facts

Henry II also developed a presenting jury Henry II also developed a presenting jury which was the forerunner of the Grand which was the forerunner of the Grand JuryJury

His legal reforms have led him to be seen His legal reforms have led him to be seen as the founder of English Common Law.as the founder of English Common Law.

1212thth & 13 & 13thth Century Century Civil and criminal disputes Civil and criminal disputes

were commonly settled by were commonly settled by battles and ordeals - in battles and ordeals - in which the accused might be which the accused might be compelled to dip his hand in compelled to dip his hand in boiling water to see if it boiling water to see if it became infected – under the became infected – under the assumption that God would assumption that God would intervene on behalf of the intervene on behalf of the right or innocent party. right or innocent party.

Pope Innocent II forbade Pope Innocent II forbade priest involvement – without priest involvement – without clergy involvement – it lost clergy involvement – it lost its validity its validity

Magna CartaMagna Carta In June 1215, England’s King John In June 1215, England’s King John

signed the Magna Carta at signed the Magna Carta at Runnymede. Runnymede.

Article 39 provided: “No freeman Article 39 provided: “No freeman shall be taken or imprisoned … shall be taken or imprisoned … except by the lawful judgment of except by the lawful judgment of his peers or by the law of the his peers or by the law of the land.” land.”

The original purpose of Magna The original purpose of Magna Carta was to reassert the rights of Carta was to reassert the rights of powerful English noblemen powerful English noblemen against the king, not to grant new against the king, not to grant new liberties to the English people at liberties to the English people at large.large.

In King John’s mind it was simply a In King John’s mind it was simply a bargaining chip, a stalling tactic.bargaining chip, a stalling tactic.

The Magna Carta only lasted 3 The Magna Carta only lasted 3 months, not of much significance. months, not of much significance. But history showed otherwise. But history showed otherwise.

It became a beacon of liberty in It became a beacon of liberty in Britain and U.S. Britain and U.S.

William PennWilliam Penn By 1664 English juries By 1664 English juries

were routinely being were routinely being fined for acquitting fined for acquitting defendants. defendants.

Such was the case in Such was the case in the 1670 political trial the 1670 political trial of William Penn, who of William Penn, who was charged with was charged with preaching Quakerism to preaching Quakerism to an unlawful assembly. an unlawful assembly.

Four of the twelve Four of the twelve jurors voted to acquit - jurors voted to acquit - and continued to acquit and continued to acquit even after being even after being imprisoned and starved imprisoned and starved for four days. Under for four days. Under such duress, most such duress, most jurors paid the fines. jurors paid the fines.

Independence of the JuryIndependence of the Jury

Imagine that you were locked up in a Imagine that you were locked up in a room without food and water and room without food and water and then fined and imprisoned because then fined and imprisoned because you refused, as a juror, to convict the you refused, as a juror, to convict the defendants in a criminal case.defendants in a criminal case.

This was the fate of Edward Bushell, This was the fate of Edward Bushell, a seventeenth-century resident of a seventeenth-century resident of London, England.London, England.

Conventicle ActConventicle Act The British Parliament had passed a law The British Parliament had passed a law

known as the Conventicle Act. This Act known as the Conventicle Act. This Act banned public assemblies of members of banned public assemblies of members of “noncomforming” religious groups.“noncomforming” religious groups.

It forbade the assembling of five or more It forbade the assembling of five or more persons for religious worship other than persons for religious worship other than Anglican. Anglican.

Nonconforming religions were those that Nonconforming religions were those that differed from the doctrines of England’s differed from the doctrines of England’s established church, the Church of England. established church, the Church of England.

Edward Bushell, a juror, refused to pay Edward Bushell, a juror, refused to pay and brought his case before the Court of and brought his case before the Court of Common Pleas. He said, "My liberty is not Common Pleas. He said, "My liberty is not for sale." for sale."

Chief Justice VaughanChief Justice Vaughan Chief Justice Vaughan issued an historically-Chief Justice Vaughan issued an historically-

important ruling: that jurors could not be important ruling: that jurors could not be punished for their verdicts. punished for their verdicts.

Jurors must ultimately fall back on their own Jurors must ultimately fall back on their own consciences, and that this cannot be consciences, and that this cannot be interfered with by judges because, “a man interfered with by judges because, “a man cannot see by another’s eye, nor hear by cannot see by another’s eye, nor hear by another’s ear; no more can a man another’s ear; no more can a man conclude... by another’s understanding or conclude... by another’s understanding or reasoning.” reasoning.”

Bushell's Case (1670) was one of the most Bushell's Case (1670) was one of the most important developments in the common-important developments in the common-law history of the jury. law history of the jury.

The decision affirmed the independence of The decision affirmed the independence of juries … and William Penn went on to found juries … and William Penn went on to found Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania.

Zenger TrialZenger Trial Juries were a the Juries were a the

forefront of the forefront of the American colonists’ American colonists’ struggle for struggle for independence. independence.

Some local juries Some local juries refused to convict refused to convict people who violated people who violated unpopular British laws.unpopular British laws.

In 1735, the English In 1735, the English authorities charged a authorities charged a New York newspaper New York newspaper printer, John Peter printer, John Peter Zenger, with publishing Zenger, with publishing articles critical of the articles critical of the government.government.

Zenger con’tZenger con’t The judge, who was The judge, who was

sympathetic to the sympathetic to the King, told the jury that King, told the jury that under English law the under English law the very fact of printing the very fact of printing the critical articles was critical articles was enough to convict the enough to convict the printer…no matter printer…no matter whether true or false.whether true or false.

Zenger’s lawyer, Zenger’s lawyer, Andrew Hamilton, had Andrew Hamilton, had a different view of the a different view of the jury’s role. jury’s role.

He told them that they He told them that they “are to see with their “are to see with their own eyes … and to own eyes … and to make use of their own make use of their own consciences … in consciences … in judging … their fellow judging … their fellow subjects.” subjects.”

Zenger con’tZenger con’t Hamilton said they Hamilton said they

should acquit Zenger if should acquit Zenger if they found that the they found that the statements he printed statements he printed were not false.were not false.

The jury did acquit him.The jury did acquit him. Gouverneur Morris, one Gouverneur Morris, one

of the Founders, later of the Founders, later wrote “The trial of wrote “The trial of Zenger was the germ Zenger was the germ of American freedom, of American freedom, the morning star of … the morning star of … liberty.” liberty.”

Andrew Hamilton

Navigation ActsNavigation Acts Although Great Britain emerged victorious Although Great Britain emerged victorious

in the Seven Years War, it left Great Britain in the Seven Years War, it left Great Britain with significant debt. The British looked to with significant debt. The British looked to America to help it.America to help it.

First the British began enforcing existing First the British began enforcing existing laws like the laws like the Navigation ActsNavigation Acts, which put , which put limits on colonial imports and exports. To limits on colonial imports and exports. To enforce these laws better, the British enforce these laws better, the British passed the "Writs of Assistance" that gave passed the "Writs of Assistance" that gave officials warrants to search anything or officials warrants to search anything or anyone suspected of smuggling, anywhere anyone suspected of smuggling, anywhere or anytime. or anytime.

British warships would even patrol British warships would even patrol American harbors to catch potential American harbors to catch potential smugglers. These smugglers, if caught, smugglers. These smugglers, if caught, would be tried in the newly established would be tried in the newly established Admiralty courts. Admiralty courts.

In these courts, the accused had In these courts, the accused had no right no right to trial by juryto trial by jury, and the judges pocketed , and the judges pocketed a percentage of the fines. The British a percentage of the fines. The British viewed these courts as insurance to make viewed these courts as insurance to make sure smuggling stopped; sure smuggling stopped; juries juries composed of Americans might be composed of Americans might be biased, so they were done away with. biased, so they were done away with.

Juries and ConstitutionJuries and Constitution To prevent oppression by the To prevent oppression by the

government, the Founders government, the Founders made trial by jury one of our made trial by jury one of our great constitutional great constitutional guarantees.guarantees.

Trial by jury in both civil and Trial by jury in both civil and criminal cases is explicitly criminal cases is explicitly granted by the Sixth and granted by the Sixth and Seventh Amendments to the Seventh Amendments to the U.S. Constitution and is also U.S. Constitution and is also guaranteed by every state guaranteed by every state constitution.constitution.

In the words of Thomas In the words of Thomas Jefferson, “Jefferson, “trial by jury is trial by jury is the only anchor yet the only anchor yet imagined by man by imagined by man by which a government can which a government can be held to the principles be held to the principles of its constitutionof its constitution.” .”

The Right to ServeThe Right to Serve Initially, service on juries was Initially, service on juries was

limited to white men who owned limited to white men who owned enough property to qualify for enough property to qualify for service.service.

When the 14When the 14thth Amendment to the Amendment to the Constitution was ratified in 1868, it Constitution was ratified in 1868, it promised equal protection of the promised equal protection of the laws to all US citizens. laws to all US citizens.

The Supreme Court ruled that equal The Supreme Court ruled that equal protection applied to trial by jury. protection applied to trial by jury.

Strauder v. West VirginiaStrauder v. West Virginia (1880) (1880) Virginia v. RivesVirginia v. Rives (1880) the same (1880) the same

year, limited Strauder decision by year, limited Strauder decision by holding that a right to be holding that a right to be considered for jury service was no considered for jury service was no the same as a right to serve on the the same as a right to serve on the jury. jury.

As a result, blacks were routinely As a result, blacks were routinely excluded from actual service on excluded from actual service on juries.juries.

Batson ChallengeBatson Challenge The systematic exclusion of The systematic exclusion of

blacks from juries in many parts blacks from juries in many parts of the US did not begin to of the US did not begin to weaken until the civil rights weaken until the civil rights struggles of the 1960s and struggles of the 1960s and beyond.beyond.

In 1986, the US Supreme Court In 1986, the US Supreme Court took a major step toward limiting took a major step toward limiting these practices in these practices in Batson vs. Batson vs. KentuckyKentucky. .

Prosecutor used peremptory Prosecutor used peremptory challenges to eliminate all four of challenges to eliminate all four of the black persons on the venire, the black persons on the venire, resulting in all white jury that resulting in all white jury that convicted the black defendant.convicted the black defendant.

Batson argued that the Batson argued that the prosecutor had used his prosecutor had used his challenges to alter the racial challenges to alter the racial make-up of the jury in violation make-up of the jury in violation of his constitutional rights of of his constitutional rights of equal protection.equal protection.

The US Supreme Court agreed. The US Supreme Court agreed. Jurors of a particular race cannot Jurors of a particular race cannot be purposefully excluded from be purposefully excluded from jury service. jury service.

Lawyers must now be prepared Lawyers must now be prepared to prove that they had race to prove that they had race neutral reasons for peremptory neutral reasons for peremptory challenges.challenges.

Women on JuriesWomen on Juries Women also faced a long Women also faced a long

struggle. struggle. Although gaining the Although gaining the

right to vote in 1920, it right to vote in 1920, it was not until 1975 was not until 1975 (Taylor vs. Louisiana) (Taylor vs. Louisiana) that their ability to serve that their ability to serve on juries on equal terms on juries on equal terms with men was finally with men was finally secured.secured.

In 1994, the US Supreme In 1994, the US Supreme Court extended the Court extended the BastonBaston case to prohibit case to prohibit peremptory challenges of peremptory challenges of jurors based on their sex.jurors based on their sex.

Juries and the PressJuries and the Press On July 4, 1954, Marilyn On July 4, 1954, Marilyn

Sheppard, the pregnant wife Sheppard, the pregnant wife of a prominent physician, was of a prominent physician, was found bludgeoned to death in found bludgeoned to death in her suburban Cleveland her suburban Cleveland home. The husband, Dr. Sam home. The husband, Dr. Sam Sheppard, immediately Sheppard, immediately became the prime suspect became the prime suspect and a media frenzy erupted.and a media frenzy erupted.

All but one of the jurors All but one of the jurors selected to serve stated that selected to serve stated that they had followed coverage of they had followed coverage of the case in the local media.the case in the local media.

The media frenzy continued The media frenzy continued during the trial. Sheppard’s during the trial. Sheppard’s trial was one of the first trial was one of the first sensational trials of our sensational trials of our modern television age. modern television age.

Sheppard v. MaxwellSheppard v. Maxwell The The ShepparSheppard case brought to d case brought to

sharp conflict the 1sharp conflict the 1stst Amendment rights of the press Amendment rights of the press to cover the trial and to cover the trial and Sheppard’s 6Sheppard’s 6thth Amendment Amendment right to a fair trial by an right to a fair trial by an impartial jury.impartial jury.

In 1966, the US Supreme Court In 1966, the US Supreme Court held that Sheppard’s held that Sheppard’s constitutional rights had been constitutional rights had been violated. violated.

The Court’s opinion cited the The Court’s opinion cited the principle that “the jury’s verdict principle that “the jury’s verdict be based on evidence received be based on evidence received in open court, not from outside in open court, not from outside sources.” sources.”

This case went on to inspire the This case went on to inspire the TV series and movies known as TV series and movies known as The Fugitive. The Fugitive.

David Janssen, The Fugitive

O.J. & ScottO.J. & Scott Other cases have had great Other cases have had great

media participation that have media participation that have raised new challenges since raised new challenges since the Sheppard decision.the Sheppard decision.

Television cameras broadcast Television cameras broadcast the trial proceedings in their the trial proceedings in their entirety, effectively inviting entirety, effectively inviting the television audience to the television audience to reach its own verdict.reach its own verdict.

Recently, the murder trial of Recently, the murder trial of Scott Peterson also Scott Peterson also dominated the national news.dominated the national news.

Alabama Courts & MediaAlabama Courts & Media Rule 9.4 of the Alabama Rules of Rule 9.4 of the Alabama Rules of

Criminal Procedure say that Criminal Procedure say that television cameras, etc., may be television cameras, etc., may be permitted if it complies with permitted if it complies with Canon 3 A.(7) & (7B) of Canons of Canon 3 A.(7) & (7B) of Canons of Judicial Ethics.Judicial Ethics.

The Canon requires the Supreme The Canon requires the Supreme Court to have approved a plan for Court to have approved a plan for the courtroom use of media the courtroom use of media equipment and that all parties equipment and that all parties have consented to their use.have consented to their use.

A testifying witness or juror can A testifying witness or juror can object which will require the judge object which will require the judge to immediately suspend or stop to immediately suspend or stop the photographing or the photographing or broadcasting. broadcasting.

Rather than deciding to Rather than deciding to completely prohibit all completely prohibit all broadcasting, etc. the court has broadcasting, etc. the court has devised a system which would devised a system which would allow, under limited allow, under limited circumstances, the use of circumstances, the use of sophisticated equipment to sophisticated equipment to broadcast the court proceedings.broadcast the court proceedings.

Impartial Jury vs. Free PressImpartial Jury vs. Free Press Other ways to guard an jury against intense Other ways to guard an jury against intense

media attention is to change the venue of the media attention is to change the venue of the trial or sequester the jury.trial or sequester the jury.

Alabama Criminal Rule 19.3(b) requires the Alabama Criminal Rule 19.3(b) requires the trial court to admonish all juries that they are trial court to admonish all juries that they are not:not: To discuss among themselves any subject To discuss among themselves any subject

connected with the trial until the cause is connected with the trial until the cause is submitted to them for deliberation;submitted to them for deliberation;

To converse with anyone else on any subject To converse with anyone else on any subject connected with the trial, until they are discharged connected with the trial, until they are discharged as jurors in the case;as jurors in the case;

To knowingly expose themselves to outside To knowingly expose themselves to outside comments or to news accounts of the comments or to news accounts of the proceedings, until they are discharged as jurors in proceedings, until they are discharged as jurors in the case; orthe case; or

To form or express any opinion on the case until it To form or express any opinion on the case until it is submitted to them for deliberation. is submitted to them for deliberation.

Qualifications of JurorsQualifications of Jurors Section 12-16-60 of Section 12-16-60 of Alabama CodeAlabama Code

states that a prospective juror states that a prospective juror should be generally reputed to be should be generally reputed to be honest and intelligent and is honest and intelligent and is esteemed in the community for esteemed in the community for integrity, good character and integrity, good character and sound judgment and also;sound judgment and also; Is citizen of US and resident of county Is citizen of US and resident of county

for 12 months and is over 19 years of for 12 months and is over 19 years of ageage

Is able to read, speak, understand and Is able to read, speak, understand and follow instructions given by a judge in follow instructions given by a judge in the English language;the English language;

Is mentally and physically capable…Is mentally and physically capable… Has not lost the right to vote by Has not lost the right to vote by

convictionconviction Section 12-16-62 says there are Section 12-16-62 says there are

no exemptions from jury service.no exemptions from jury service. Excusing or deferral of prospective Excusing or deferral of prospective

jurors for undue hardship is in the jurors for undue hardship is in the discretion of the presiding judgediscretion of the presiding judge

OATH

Based on the book by John Grisham…Some trials are too important to be left to juries. A high priced jury consultant played by Gene Hackman will stop at nothing to secure a verdict for his client. He is up against an honest Plaintiff’s lawyer (of course, this is fiction) who questions him on his tactics.

Challenges of Jurors for CauseChallenges of Jurors for Cause Section 12-16-150 says a good ground for Section 12-16-150 says a good ground for

challenge by either party is:challenge by either party is: Not resident of county Not resident of county Not citizen of AlabamaNot citizen of Alabama Indicted in last 12 months same character Indicted in last 12 months same character

offenseoffense Related to the defendant or prosecutor Related to the defendant or prosecutor

Convicted of felonyConvicted of felony Interest in conviction or acquittal of Interest in conviction or acquittal of

defendantdefendant Fixed opinion about guilt or innocenceFixed opinion about guilt or innocence Under 19 years of ageUnder 19 years of age Not of sound mindNot of sound mind Witness or party Witness or party

Further Criminal Case Challenges Further Criminal Case Challenges

Good cause of challenge by the State:Good cause of challenge by the State: that the person would refuse to that the person would refuse to

impose the death penalty regardless impose the death penalty regardless of the evidenceof the evidence

that the person has a fixed opinion that the person has a fixed opinion against penitentiary punishmentagainst penitentiary punishment

that the person thinks that a that the person thinks that a conviction should not be had on conviction should not be had on circumstantial evidence circumstantial evidence

(Section 12-16-152 Alabama Code)(Section 12-16-152 Alabama Code)

Peremptory ChallengesPeremptory Challenges

After the dismissal of jurors for causeAfter the dismissal of jurors for cause Both sides may exercise peremptory Both sides may exercise peremptory

challenges, which are dismissals the challenges, which are dismissals the lawyer can make without providing a lawyer can make without providing a reasonreason

However, as we have seen in the However, as we have seen in the BatsonBatson decision, peremptory decision, peremptory challenges can not exclude jurors challenges can not exclude jurors because of their race or sex because of their race or sex

Number of Jurors (Rule 18.4)Number of Jurors (Rule 18.4) In Alabama state court 12 jurors must reach In Alabama state court 12 jurors must reach

unanimous verdictunanimous verdict To determine who to strike lawyers may conduct To determine who to strike lawyers may conduct

Voir Dire (French word meaning “to speak the Voir Dire (French word meaning “to speak the truth”) examination to question prospective jurors truth”) examination to question prospective jurors to determine possible bias to determine possible bias

To strike a jury for a capital case you must have at To strike a jury for a capital case you must have at least 36 jurors, for felony case at least 24 jurors, least 36 jurors, for felony case at least 24 jurors, and for misdemeanor jury appeal, 18 jurors are and for misdemeanor jury appeal, 18 jurors are required to strike from.required to strike from.

Court has discretion on deciding how many Court has discretion on deciding how many alternate jurors go on a case, but no less than two alternate jurors go on a case, but no less than two are required in capital cases.are required in capital cases.

An alternate juror who does not replace a principal An alternate juror who does not replace a principal juror shall be discharged at the time the jury juror shall be discharged at the time the jury retires to consider its verdict.retires to consider its verdict.

The alternate juror does not know they are an The alternate juror does not know they are an alternate until the jury retires to begin alternate until the jury retires to begin deliberations. deliberations.

Juror MisconductJuror Misconduct During selection lying in During selection lying in

response to voir dire questionsresponse to voir dire questions Making improper contacts – Making improper contacts –

witnesses, parties, lawyers, or witnesses, parties, lawyers, or outside the case like relatives outside the case like relatives or pressor press

Drugs, alcohol, or sleeping Drugs, alcohol, or sleeping during courtduring court

Receiving information that is Receiving information that is not evidence and sharing it not evidence and sharing it with other jurorswith other jurors Visiting scene of crime or tortVisiting scene of crime or tort Conducting experimentsConducting experiments Legal or factual researchLegal or factual research Reading or watching news reports Reading or watching news reports

During deliberations refusing to During deliberations refusing to participate, coercing jurors, participate, coercing jurors, making prejudicial statementsmaking prejudicial statements

Hard to stay awake with some

lawyers!

Juror Misconduct (con’t)Juror Misconduct (con’t) Improper mechanisms for Improper mechanisms for

arriving at a verdictarriving at a verdict Using a game of chance, such Using a game of chance, such

as a coin flipas a coin flip Agreeing to ignore the lawAgreeing to ignore the law Agreeing to a “quotient Agreeing to a “quotient

verdict” in a civil case; that is, verdict” in a civil case; that is, arriving at a damages amount arriving at a damages amount by taking a figure from each by taking a figure from each juror, and averaging themjuror, and averaging them

Corrupt conduct like taking Corrupt conduct like taking a bribe or establishing a a bribe or establishing a close personal relationship close personal relationship with a trial participant with a trial participant

Note TakingNote Taking The norm in most courts is that The norm in most courts is that

jurors can not take notes, but it is jurors can not take notes, but it is often sited as a good jury reformoften sited as a good jury reform

Reasons note taking is objected Reasons note taking is objected to:to: May cause jurors to miss May cause jurors to miss

something important that is something important that is occurring because the jurors are occurring because the jurors are busy writing notes about what has busy writing notes about what has already occurredalready occurred

May cause jurors to discount their May cause jurors to discount their memories of the testimonymemories of the testimony

May result in jurors doodling May result in jurors doodling rather than taking notesrather than taking notes

May result in most prolific note May result in most prolific note taker dominating the deliberationstaker dominating the deliberations

Could be perverted by a note Could be perverted by a note taker who is dishonesttaker who is dishonest

Note taking is not often done in Note taking is not often done in Alabama, but it is a matter within Alabama, but it is a matter within the discretion of the trial court. the discretion of the trial court. ((Poole vs. StatePoole vs. State, 650 So.2d 541 , 650 So.2d 541 (Ala.Crim.App. 1994) Note taking (Ala.Crim.App. 1994) Note taking is proper, desirable and not a is proper, desirable and not a ground for misconduct in and of ground for misconduct in and of itself. itself.

DeadlockedDeadlocked When the judge is first When the judge is first

informed that a jury is informed that a jury is deadlocked, almost every deadlocked, almost every jurisdiction, including jurisdiction, including Alabama, has some version Alabama, has some version of an instruction the judge of an instruction the judge can give to encourage the can give to encourage the jury to continue to jury to continue to deliberate.deliberate.

This is called an “Allen This is called an “Allen Charge” after the 1896 Charge” after the 1896 Supreme Court case of Supreme Court case of Allen Allen v. USv. US..

This charge is also called a This charge is also called a “dynamite” charge which is “dynamite” charge which is designed to blast the log-designed to blast the log-jam of disagreement. jam of disagreement.

If deadlock persist, the judge If deadlock persist, the judge will declare a mistrial, and will declare a mistrial, and the case will be set for the case will be set for retrial.retrial.

Employment Protection & PayEmployment Protection & Pay Employers under Alabama Employers under Alabama

law are forbidden from law are forbidden from discharging employees for discharging employees for jury servicejury service An employee who is so An employee who is so

discharged shall have a cause discharged shall have a cause of action against the employer of action against the employer for said discharge in any court for said discharge in any court of competent jurisdiction in this of competent jurisdiction in this state and shall be entitled to state and shall be entitled to recover both actual and recover both actual and punitive damages. (12-16-18.1)punitive damages. (12-16-18.1)

Pay for grand and petit jurors Pay for grand and petit jurors is the grand amount of $10 is the grand amount of $10 per day and 5 cents a mile. per day and 5 cents a mile. (12-19-210) (12-19-210)

Jury Service AttitudesJury Service Attitudes Nearly a million Americans serve on a jury Nearly a million Americans serve on a jury

each yeareach year About 5 times that number show up to their About 5 times that number show up to their

local courthouse to report for jury dutylocal courthouse to report for jury duty An ABA survey in 2004 showed:An ABA survey in 2004 showed:

¾ of those polled said jury duty is not burden to ¾ of those polled said jury duty is not burden to be avoidedbe avoided

58% consider jury duty a privilege they look 58% consider jury duty a privilege they look forward to fulfillingforward to fulfilling

Most who served say they would like to do it Most who served say they would like to do it againagain

The Bad news:The Bad news: In practice Americans don’t value service. In practice Americans don’t value service.

Problems with response rates to jury summons.Problems with response rates to jury summons. 20% of people who actually receive a juror 20% of people who actually receive a juror

summons simply ignore it.summons simply ignore it. Public often perceives it negatively, as an Public often perceives it negatively, as an

inconvenience to avoid.inconvenience to avoid.

For the FutureFor the Future Unveiled on September 13, Unveiled on September 13,

1993, the Courtroom 21 Project 1993, the Courtroom 21 Project is an ongoing international is an ongoing international demonstration and demonstration and experimental effort which experimental effort which seeks to determine how seeks to determine how technology can best improve technology can best improve all components of the legal all components of the legal system. It includes, in the system. It includes, in the College of William & Mary Law College of William & Mary Law School's McGlothlin Courtroom, School's McGlothlin Courtroom, the world's most the world's most technologically advanced trial technologically advanced trial and appellate courtroom. A and appellate courtroom. A joint project of the Law School joint project of the Law School and the National Center for and the National Center for State Courts. State Courts.

More court rooms, especially More court rooms, especially federal courts, have computer federal courts, have computer assisted jury boxes. assisted jury boxes.

Take it from a Football PlayerTake it from a Football PlayerFormer US Supreme Court Justice Byron “Whizzer” White who was a former college and NFL football star and a conservative on the Court from 1962-1993 said the following about juries in 1975:

“The purpose of a jury is to guard against the exercise of arbitrary power – to make available the common sense judgment of the community as a hedge against the overzealous or mistaken prosecutor and in preference to the professional or perhaps conditioned or biased response of a judge.”

ConclusionConclusion Trial by jury is a vital part of Trial by jury is a vital part of

our democracy secured by our democracy secured by our constitution.our constitution.

Besides voting, nothing is so Besides voting, nothing is so active and participatory in active and participatory in nature.nature.

Jurors have an opportunity Jurors have an opportunity to provide a great service, to provide a great service, but they also have a but they also have a tremendous responsibility. tremendous responsibility.

The more clearly adults The more clearly adults understand their roles as understand their roles as potential jurors before they potential jurors before they are called to jury service, are called to jury service, the more they will the more they will appreciate their duty and appreciate their duty and the better they will fulfill the better they will fulfill their responsibilities when their responsibilities when that day arrives. that day arrives.

VERDICT

THE ENDTHE END

Presented by Bill Filmore, ADA

The American The American JuryJury

We the People in ActionWe the People in Action