Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 19, 2024 Fri
Time: 7:30 am
Time: 7:30 am
Results for juries
20 results foundAuthor: Goodman-Delahunty, Jane Title: Improving Jury Understanding and Use of Expert DNA Evidence Summary: The use of DNA evidence in Australian courts has increased exponentially in the last two decades. DNA technology is well-validated and no longer the subject of defense challenges. Juror difficulties in understanding and applying the scientific and statistical information conveyed by forensic experts about a DNA match have been documented in qualitative and quantitative studies. Details: Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology, 2010. 68p. Source: Technical and Background Paper no. 37; Internet Resource Year: 2010 Country: Australia URL: Shelf Number: 118096 Keywords: DNA TypingExpert WitnesesJuries |
Author: Equal Justice Initiative Title: Illegal Racial Discrimination in Jury Selection: A Continuing Legacy Summary: The staff of the Equal Justice Initiative looked closely at jury selection procedures in Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Tennessee. It reviewed hundreds of court documents and interviewed more than 100 African Americans who had been excluded from juries due to racial bias. It found that some were struck from juries for stated reasons such as low intelligence, wearing glasses, manner of walking, and residing in a predominantly black neighborhood. Alabama's appellate courts found racial discrimination in jury selection in 25 death penalty cases in recent years. The Initiative also found evidence that some district attorney's offices teach prosecutors how to strike racial minorities from juries in a way that seems race-neutral. The report recommends thorough enforcement of anti-discrimination laws bearing on jury selection; penalties for prosecutors found to have engaged in discriminatory exclusions; monitoring of court proceedings and officials' conduct; greater diversity in the judiciary, district attorneys' offices, the defense bar, and law enforcement; and state action to ensure diversity in jury pools, among other remedies. Details: Montgomery, AL: Equal Justice Initiative, 2010. 61p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 118738 Keywords: JuriesJurorsRacial Discrimination |
Author: Flower, Shawn M. Title: Disparities in Jury Outcomes: Baltimore City vs. Three Surrounding Jurisdictions - An Empirical Examination Summary: Do juries in Baltimore City convict defendants at different rates than juries in other jurisdictions? This is the question answered by the current study, which examined a total of 293 cases – a random sample of 98 cases from Baltimore City of all cases where a jury trial was prayed or scheduled in fiscal year 2006 (July 1, 2005 to June 30, 2006) and all cases disposed by jury trial in Anne Arundel (85 cases), Baltimore (78 cases) and Howard Counties (32 cases) from July 1, 2005 through December 31, 2006. Details: Baltimore, MD: Abell Foundation, 2008. 54p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 20, 2010 at: http://www.abell.org/pubsitems/Disparities-cj.908.pdf Year: 2008 Country: United States URL: http://www.abell.org/pubsitems/Disparities-cj.908.pdf Shelf Number: 113576 Keywords: DefendantsJuriesTrials |
Author: Anwar, Shamena Title: Jury Discrimination in Criminal Trials Summary: This paper examines the impact of jury racial composition on trial outcomes using a unique dataset of all felony trials in Sarasota County, Florida between 2004 and 2009. We utilize a research design that exploits day-to-day variation in the composition of the jury pool to isolate quasi-random variation in the composition of the seated jury. We find strong evidence that all-white juries acquit whites more often and are less favorable to black versus white defendants when compared to juries with at least one black member. Using the Anwar-Fang rank order test, we find strong statistical evidence of discrimination on the basis of defendant race. These results are consistent with racial prejudice on the part of white jurors, black jurors, or both. Using a simple model of jury selection and decision-making, we replicate the entire set of empirical regularities observed in the data, including the fact that blacks in the jury pool are just as likely as whites to be seated. Simulations of the model suggest that jurors of each race are heterogeneous in the standards of evidence that they require to convict and that both black and white defendants would prefer to face jurors of the same race. Details: Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2010. 42p. Source: Internet Resource: NBER Working Paper Series; Working Paper 16366: Accessed October 5, 2010 at: http://www.nber.org/papers/w16366.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w16366.pdf Shelf Number: 119863 Keywords: CourtsDiscriminationJuriesJurorsTrials |
Author: Roberts, Julian V. Title: Public Opinion and the Jury: An International Literature Review Summary: There is substantial literature on the legal institution of the jury and on the experiences of jurors. However less is known about public attitudes to juries. This report sought to help address this knowledge gap. It draws together findings from the small number of quantitative surveys that have asked the general public questions on this subject. It focuses on survey findings from England and Wales, but also considers international research. The report indicates high levels of confidence in the jury amongst the general public. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2009. 50p. Source: Internet Resource: Ministry of Justice Research Series 1/09: Accessed October 9, 2010 at: http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/docs/public-opinion-and-the-jury-by-roberts-and-hough-web(1).pdf Year: 2009 Country: International URL: http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/docs/public-opinion-and-the-jury-by-roberts-and-hough-web(1).pdf Shelf Number: 114353 Keywords: JuriesJurorsPublic Opinion |
Author: Bowen, Edward F. (Sheriff Principal) Title: The Independent Review of Sheriff and Jury Procedure Summary: The report presents the final report of an independent review of the procedures for sheriff and jury criminal court cases in Scotland. The main recommendations are: To only cite witnesses to give evidence in a case once it is known the case will proceed to trial - this will result in significant savings, both in reducing inconvenience to witnesses and in the cost of citing witnesses; To introduce a 'new compulsory business meeting' to bring together the Crown and defence to discuss cases at an early stage of proceedings- this will result in parties being better prepared for court appearances and produce a higher number of pleas of guilty at an early stage in proceedings; To enhance the current statutory provisions and require the Crown and defence at First Diet to be able to inform the court about their preparation of the case and allow the court to resolve any issues to be addressed at that stage- this will mean that First Diets should work as intended as a clearing house for cases going to trial; To allow a longer period between the indictment of the case and the first diet - this will allow for outstanding issues to be resolved before First Diet, thereby minimising the need for continued First Diets; To accommodate these procedural changes, it is proposed that the statutory time limits for commencing trials in sheriff and jury cases be extended for custody cases to 140 days, this is in line with the High Court time limit. The report also proposes that legal aid provision for sheriff and jury cases should be reviewed so that it supports early resolution of cases, as it does in the High Court and in summary justice. Alongside the recommendations for changes to procedure, the report also makes a number of practical recommendations. These include considering wider use of TV links between courts and prisons, greater use of standby arrangements for witnesses, continuity of sheriffs involved in individual cases and sheriffs taking a more rigorous approach to the issue of persons not attending for jury duty without excuse. Details: Edinburgh: The Independent Review of Sheriff and Jury Procedure, 2010. 145p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 29, 2010 at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2010/06/10093251/17 Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2010/06/10093251/17 Shelf Number: 120309 Keywords: Criminal Courts (Scotland)JuriesSheriffs |
Author: Bertrand, Lorne D. Title: Juror Stress Debriefing: A Review of the Literature and an Evaluation of a Yukon Program Summary: In 2005, the Yukon Department of Justice received funding from Justice Canada to set up a pilot project to research the jury experience in the Yukon during the course of homicide trials that were expected to take place during the following two years. The intent of the project was to evaluate the effectiveness of providing jury debriefing sessions in mitigating stress that jurors may experience as a result of serving on these juries. The study would contribute to the modernization of the justice system in the north and in small communities by providing valuable information about the impact on jurors of the experience of being involved in long and complex trials. The project examined the stresses that Canadian jurors experience when they sit on trials that are lengthy, complex and that contain large volumes of information that may often be disturbing. It considered what kinds of assistance might be appropriate to debrief juries so that they could deal effectively with emotionally distressing information to which they were exposed during the course of the trial. The project also examined the particular stresses that inhabitants of small communities with a significant Aboriginal population experience as a result of sitting on juries in those communities. A further aspect of the project was to look at the limits of doing research on juries in Canada given the restrictions set out in s. 649 of the Criminal Code of Canada. Details: Calgary, Alberta: Canadian Research Institute for Law and the Family, 2008. 100p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 8, 2011 at: http://people.ucalgary.ca/~crilf/publications/Jury_Stress_Final_Report.pdf Year: 2008 Country: Canada URL: http://people.ucalgary.ca/~crilf/publications/Jury_Stress_Final_Report.pdf Shelf Number: 120886 Keywords: CourtsJuriesJurors (Canada)Trials |
Author: Anwar, Shamena Title: The Impact of Jury Race in Criminal Trials Summary: This paper examines the impact of jury racial composition on trial outcomes using a unique data set of all felony trials in Florida between 2000-2010. We utilize a research design that exploits day-to-day variation in the composition of the jury pool to isolate quasi-random variation in the composition of the seated jury, finding evidence that: (i) juries formed from all-white juries pools convict black defendants significantly (16 percentage points) more often than white defendants and (ii) this gap in conviction rates is entirely eliminated when the jury pool includes at least one black member. IV estimates of the of the racial composition of the seated jury on trial outcomes are about 2.5 times greater than the corresponding OLS estimates, implying that the impact of jury race is much greater than what a simple correlation of the race of the seated jury and conviction rates would suggest. These findings imply that the application of justice is highly uneven and raise obvious concerns about the fairness of trials in jurisdictions with a small proportion of blacks in the jury pool. Details: Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2010. 37p. Source: Internet Resource: NBER Working Paper Series; Working Paper 16366: Accessed June 17, 2011 at: http://www.nber.org/papers/w16366 Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w16366 Shelf Number: 121835 Keywords: Criminal TrialsJuriesJurors (U.S.)Race |
Author: Moore, Marla Title: Report to the Georgia Jury Composition Committee Summary: In 2003, the Georgia Supreme Court established the Jury Composition Committee under the direction of Justice Hugh Thompson. The Committee is comprised of judges, defense and prosecuting attorneys, court administrators, and court clerks. The Committee’s charge was to evaluate whether Georgia can reform the current juror selection system (balanced box) and adopt an inclusive statewide source. The Committee investigated three questions: 1. Is the American Bar Association (ABA) “inclusiveness standard” a feasible alternative to the balanced box protocol? The ABA standard states that if the source list includes at least 85% of eligible adults, the list is deemed inclusive because it reflects a fair cross-section of potential jurors. If jurors are randomly sampled from this list, the resulting list should not systematically exclude any cognizable groups, and therefore should be inclusive. 2. Is it feasible to compile a centralized, statewide source list in a cost-effective manner, and to distribute the resulting list to Jury Commissioners for review and verification? 3. What additional procedures, policies, data, or technology are required to compile an inclusive source list? The Committee study used Georgia’s statewide voter registration and driver’s license databases, which together consist of approximately 17 million records. These two lists are the only statutorily mandated jury source lists. Although clerks can augment these sources with local lists, evidence in other states suggests that these lists, when cleaned and merged, can produce an inclusive source list using the ABA inclusiveness standard. The Committee examined ten pilot counties in the Phase I study (2008) to identify challenges and solutions required to implement an inclusive source list. This study concluded that an inclusive list is feasible if the Committee could remedy data quality problems with driver’s license records. To resolve these problems, the General Assembly amended existing Georgia statutes governing the data elements that the Georgia Department of Driver Services (DDS) can release to the county clerks. This brief report describes the Phase II study that examined Georgia’s 159 counties to assess whether it is possible to compile a defensible statewide source list that represents a fair cross-section of Georgia counties, and therefore meets the inclusiveness standard established by the ABA. This report is organized into eight chapters. Chapter 2 describes the ABA standard and considers the inclusiveness versus balanced box approach to jury selection. Chapter 3 addresses Georgia’s statutorily authorized jury source lists. Chapter 4 describes the data quality and maintenance issues associated with the voter and driver’s license databases, and examines potential solutions. Chapter 5 outlines the challenges of merging voter registration and driver’s license data. Chapter 6 summarizes the proposed process and rules to improve data quality and to create an inclusive source list. Chapter 7 describes the method for identifying and removing duplicate records once voter and driver databases are merged. Finally, Chapter 8 provides a summary of the impact the improvements have on an inclusive source list and whether the resulting source list is inclusive and represents a fair cross-section. Details: Atlanta: Georgia Adminitrative Office of the Courts and Applied Research Services, Inc., 2010. 66p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 1, 2011 at: http://ars-corp.com/_view/PDF_Files/ReporttotheGeorgiaJuryCompositionCommittee2010.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://ars-corp.com/_view/PDF_Files/ReporttotheGeorgiaJuryCompositionCommittee2010.pdf Shelf Number: 122587 Keywords: Courts (Georgia)JuriesJuror Selection |
Author: Dharmapala, Dhammika Title: Do Exclusionary Rules Convict the Innocent? Summary: Rules excluding various kinds of evidence from criminal trials play a prominent role in criminal procedure, and have generated considerable controversy. In this paper, we address the general topic of excluding factually relevant evidence, that is, the kind of evidence that would rationally influence the jury’s verdict if it were admitted. We do not offer a comprehensive analysis of these exclusionary rules, but add to the existing literature by identifying a new domain for economic analysis, focusing on how juries respond to the existence of such a rule. We show that the impact of exclusionary rules on the likelihood of conviction is complex and depends on the degree of rationality exhibited by juries and on the motivations of the prosecutor. Details: Chicago: Law School, University of Chicago, 2011. 19p. Source: Internet Resource: U of Chicago Law & Economics, Olin Working Paper No. 569 Illinois Program in Law, Behavior and Social Science Paper No. LBSS11-30, Accessed November 1, 2011 at: http://www.law.uchicago.edu/files/file/569-rma-innocent.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.law.uchicago.edu/files/file/569-rma-innocent.pdf Shelf Number: 123210 Keywords: Criminal TrialsEvidenceExclusionary RuleInnocenceJuries |
Author: Conley, Robin Helene Title: Doing Death in Texas: Language and Jury Decision-Making in Texas Death Penalty Trials Summary: This dissertation explores the means through which language and culture make death penalty decisions possible – how specific language choices mediate and restrict jurors', attorneys', and judges' actions and experiences while serving and reflecting on capital trials. More specifically, it investigates how discursive constructions of place and space are mobilized within trial participants' argumentation and reasoning about death penalty decisions; grammatical and semantic forms as both facilitating and stymying empathic and emotional experiences; and how language mediates jurors' understandings and judgments about agency and culpability, regarding both defendants' criminal actions and their own sentencing decisions. In conclusion, it argues that language is one of the primary resources by which jurors construct defendants as non-human and thus decide to sentence them to death. The dissertation research involved twelve months of fieldwork, from 2009-2010, in and around Houston, Texas for data collection. The methodologies included interviews of jurors, attorneys, judges, and prison staff; participant-observation in death penalty trials; audio-recordings and note-taking of these trials; and qualitative linguistic analyses of transcribed interviews and courtroom interaction. The overall analysis reveals that language is crucial in the making and unmaking of defendants into human beings, acts often described by theorists of law and language as violent. The dissertation argues that language mediates a central tension and source of violence in death penalty trials, between encounters with the face of another human being and the discursive, institutional making of that being. Overcoming this tension is crucial to jurors being able to sentence a defendant to death. Details: Los Angeles, CA: University of California, 2011. 317p. Source: Doctoral Dissertation: Internet Resource: Accessed February 10, 2012 at https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/236354.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/236354.pdf Shelf Number: 124044 Keywords: Death Penalty (Texas)JuriesJurors |
Author: Anwar, Shamena Title: A Fair and Impartial Jury? The Role of Age in Jury Selection and Trial Outcomes Summary: This paper uses data from over 700 felony trials in Sarasota and Lake Counties in Florida from 2000-2010 to examine the role of age in jury selection and trial outcomes. The results of the analysis imply that prosecutors are more likely to use their peremptory challenges to exclude younger members of the jury pool, while defense attorneys exclude older potential jurors. Having established that age has an important role in jury selection, the paper employs a research design that isolates the effect of the random variation in the age composition of the pool of eligible jurors called for jury duty to examine the causal impact of age on trial outcomes. Consistent with the jury selection patterns, the empirical evidence implies that older jurors are indeed more likely to convict. These results are robust to the inclusion of a broad set of controls for the racial and gender composition of the jury and a series of county, time, and judge fixed effects; almost identical effects are estimated separately for each county. These findings have implications for the role that the institution of peremptory challenges has on a defendant’s right to a fair trial and to an eligible citizen’s rights to serve on a jury. Details: Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2012. 26p. Source: NBER Working Ppaer 17887: Internet Resource: Accessed March 10, 2012 at http://www.nber.org/papers/w17887.pdf?new_window=1 Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w17887.pdf?new_window=1 Shelf Number: 124439 Keywords: Demographic TrendsJuriesJuror Selection |
Author: Johnson, Sheri Lynn Title: The Death Penalty in Delaware: An Empirical Study Summary: This article is part of a symposium that honors David Baldus, a great scholar and great man, a quiet man with a strong passion for justice. We study the operation of Delaware’s death penalty in the modern era of capital punishment. Our conclusions consist of three main observations. First, Delaware’s reversal rate in capital cases, 44%, while substantial, is also substantially less than that of other jurisdictions. This may not be surprising, given Delaware’s emphasis for much of the time period on judge sentencing and that jury verdicts offer more opportunities for reversal. Indeed, reversal rates during the jury sentencing period approximate the national average. Second, judge sentencing in Delaware results in more death sentences, a result consistent with greater harshness being the motivation behind the statutory change to judge sentencing. This effect, is more pronounced in Delaware than in other states. Third, we find a dramatic disparity of death sentencing rates by race, one substantially more pronounced than in other jurisdictions. Race matters in capital sentencing, as David Baldus told us more than a quarter of century ago, and we need to continue to pursue knowledge about where, when, and how it matters. Details: Ithaca, NY: Cornell University School of Law, 2012. 49p. Source: Internet Resource: Cornell Legal Studies Research Paper No. 12-24: Accessed November 28, 2012 at: Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 127020 Keywords: Capital PunishmentDeath Penalty (Delaware)JudgesJuriesRace |
Author: Hannaford-Agor, Paula Title: Juror and Jury Use of New Media: A Baseline Exploration Summary: Over the course of six meetings held between 2008 and 2011, the members of the Executive Session for State Court Leaders in the 21st Century considered leadership challenges presented by a series of both longstanding problems and new trends. The new social media’s turn came in April 2010 with a discussion billed as examining “the opportunities and pitfalls of new media for state court leaders.” The youngest Session member, Garrett Graff, an expert on the new media, agreed to frame the issues for everyone’s benefit. He immediately took the discussion to an unexpected place. The real challenge, he claimed, is that “this is much more than just a set of tools—this is a different way of thinking.” That is not to say that the tools themselves are unproblematic. Graff noted that one consequence of the new media is that “every single person who is now sitting in a courtroom has access to just about every piece of information ever published anywhere in the world. And that is a tremendous challenge to the way we traditionally think of sealing off the courtroom from the outside world for the duration of a trial.” Currently, jury and juror use of the Internet to conduct independent research or to engage in ex parte communications on trial-related topics is universally prohibited as a violation of the juror’s oath and can result in a mistrial or an overturned verdict. The more profound challenge, however, is the change to the very nature of how people engage in truth finding. The Kennedy School’s Christopher E. Stone summarized the challenge as a “dilemma for an institution that is used to insisting on its own ways of knowing things, ways that are different from what ordinary people do. Consider the rules of evidence—or just the rules on hearsay—we have an institution that is used to telling the whole society, ‘Yeah, yeah, you think you learn things this way, but we have different rules for acquiring knowledge in this process.’” The jury trial clearly is where new ways of truth seeking are most likely to collide with the requirements of traditional court processes. The potential casualty is fairness. Chief Justice Christine M. Durham of the Utah Supreme Court expressed skepticism about the ability of courts to find a compromise that accommodates new understandings of truth finding with the traditional trial process: “Where I have trouble is with what becomes of the fundamental definition of fairness in the American judicial system—which is founded on the concept of the adversarial system as the means of guaranteeing fairness. We have inextricably connected those two values, fairness and the adversary system, from the beginning of our history.” If judges are no longer the gatekeepers for the flow of information into a courtroom, and if jurors no longer accept the legitimacy of restrictions on what is relevant to fact finding, can the American adversarial system continue to deliver fairness? The subsequent discussion led to a broad consensus that the Executive Session should, as part of its legacy, sponsor one or more jury experiments to inform court leaders as they confront changing technology and approaches to truth finding. More specifically, the National Center for State Courts (NCSC), with its tradition of jury research, was asked to design a research project to explore the impact of the new media on juries, develop the necessary survey and other methodologies needed to explore the impact of the new media on juries, and recommend potential ways to reconcile the use of new media with the dynamics of the adversarial system. This paper frames the research issues and describes what was learned from the pilot test of a jury study in 15 civil and criminal trials. Details: Williamsburg, VA: National Center for State Courts, 2012. 16p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 17, 2012 at http://www.ncsc.org/Services-and-Experts/Court-leadership/Harvard-Executive-Session/~/media/Files/PDF/Services%20and%20Experts/Harvard%20Executive%20Session/jurorandjuryuse.ashx Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.ncsc.org/Services-and-Experts/Court-leadership/Harvard-Executive-Session/~/media/Files/PDF/Services%20and%20Experts/Harvard%20Executive%20Session/jurorandjuryuse.ashx Shelf Number: 127230 Keywords: CommunicationsInformation TechnologyJuriesJurorsMass Media and Criminal Justice |
Author: Yalincak, Orhun Hakan Title: Critical Analysis of Acquitted Conduct Sentencing in the U.S.: 'Kafka-Esque', 'Repugnant', 'Uniquely Malevolent' and 'Pernicious'? Summary: The use of acquitted at sentencing is a highly contested practice in sentencing theory and policy. In federal court and many state courts across the United States, once a defendant is convicted, judges are routinely permitted, in fact, required to increase a defendant’s sentence based on relevant conduct, of which he was acquitted at trial, or conduct for which he was never charged. This essay highlights the issues that arise from the use of acquitted conduct sentencing under the now advisory U.S. Sentencing Guidelines. The use of acquitted conduct under the relevant conduct provisions of the Guidelines has resulted in substantially longer prison sentences with a disparate impact on racial and ethnic minorities. Acquitted conduct sentencing treats the offence admitted by a defendant, or proven to a judge or jury’s satisfaction beyond a reasonable doubt as simply a starting point in calculating a defendant’s sentence; the modified real offense approach, which incorporates relevant conduct and mandates consideration of acquitted conduct, determines the end sentence. This essay concludes that use of acquitted conduct should be prohibited both on constitutional and normative grounds. While it is outside the scope of this essay to offer a comprehensive solution or alternative to the use of acquitted conduct at sentencing, the key observation is that, since the common thread linking the constitutional and normative issues arise from the fragmented nature of U.S. sentencing policy, the solution must start with re-conceptualizing the theories underlying sentencing in the U.S. Details: Unpublished paper: 2013. 38p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 6, 2013 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2293449 Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2293449 Shelf Number: 129563 Keywords: JuriesPunishmentSentencing (U.S.)Sentencing Guidelines |
Author: Dressler, Joshua Title: Rethinking Criminal Homicide Statutes: Giving Juries More Discretion Summary: It may be time to rethink our homicide statutes. Current statutes are prone to distinguish between degrees of murder in an inappropriate way: first-degree murder provisions are too often both over- and under-inclusive; and they fail to give juries sufficient leeway to draw morally appropriate distinctions. I offer here some very tentative thoughts on how murder statutes might be reformulated. Details: Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law, 2014. 12p. Source: Public Law and Legal Theory Working Paper Series, No. 247: Internet Resource: Accessed June 11, 2014 at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2433653 Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2433653 Shelf Number: 132440 Keywords: Homicide JuriesLegislation |
Author: Hans, Valerie P. Title: The Death Penalty: Should the Judge or the Jury Decide Who Dies? Summary: This article addresses the effect of judge versus jury decision making through analysis of a database of all capital sentencing phase hearing trials in the state of Delaware from 1977-2007. Over the three decades of the study, Delaware shifted responsibility for death penalty sentencing from the jury to the judge. Currently, Delaware is one of the handful of states that gives the judge the final decision making authority in capital trials. Controlling for a number of legally-relevant and other predictor variables, we find that the shift to judge sentencing significantly increased the number of death sentences. Statutory aggravating factors, stranger homicides, and the victim's gender also increased the likelihood of a death sentence, as did the county of the homicide. We reflect on the implications of these results for debates about the constitutionality of judge sentencing in capital cases Details: Ithaca, NY: Cornell Law School, 2014. 30p. Source: Internet Resource: Working Paper Series: Accessed November 18, 2014 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2513371 Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2513371 Shelf Number: 134121 Keywords: Capital PunishmentDeath Penalty (U.S.)JudgesJuriesSentencing |
Author: Anwar, Shamena Title: Politics in the Courtroom: Political Ideology and Jury Decision Making Summary: This paper uses data from the Gothenburg District Court in Sweden and a research design that exploits the random assignment of politically appointed jurors (termed namndeman) to make three contributions to the literature on jury decision-making: (i) an assessment of whether systematic biases exist in the Swedish namndeman system, (ii) causal evidence on the impact of juror political party on verdicts, and (iii) an empirical examination of the role of peer effects in jury decision-making. The results reveal a number of systematic biases: convictions for young defendants and those with distinctly Arabic sounding names increase substantially when they are randomly assigned jurors from the far-right (nationalist) Swedish Democrat party, while convictions in cases with a female victim increase markedly when they are assigned jurors from the far-left (feminist) Vnster party. The results also indicate the presence of peer effects, with jurors from both the far-left and far-right parties drawing the votes of their more centrist peers towards their positions. Peer effects take the form of both sway effects, where jurors influence the opinions of their closest peers in a way that can impact trial outcomes, and dissent aversion, where jurors switch non-pivotal votes so that the decision is unanimous. Details: Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2015. 60p. Source: Internet Resource: NBER Working Paper 21145: Accessed May 13, 2015 at: http://www.nber.org/papers/w21145.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Sweden URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w21145.pdf Shelf Number: 135625 Keywords: JuriesJuror Decision MakingJurorsJury (Sweden) |
Author: Dawson, Justin C. Title: Strategies to Mitigate the Impact of Electronic Communication and Electronic Devices on the Right to a Fair Trial Summary: he proliferation of electronic communication and electronic devices throughout modern society presents new challenges to the judicial system in protecting the right to a fair trial. Electronic communication, including texts, emails, blogs, social network posts, and other information accessed through the Internet, provides opportunities to expose confidential witnesses or informants, intimidate witnesses and victims from testifying, and bias jurors. Electronic devices can be used to record an image of a witness, identify that witness and expose him or her on the Internet, or communicate with a juror in an attempt to influence the outcome of a case. Jurors may also compromise their own independence by using electronic devices to access or share information about trial proceedings before the case is resolved. Court practices to protect the right to a fair trial have not kept pace with rapidly evolving electronic communication and devices, and traditional approaches to identify and protect against witness intimidation and to preserve juror impartiality are likely insufficient in the face of their near universal use, which facilitates access to information about nearly anything and anyone. On behalf of the National Institute of Justice, the Priority Criminal Justice Needs Initiative convened a panel, including judges, lawyers, educators, and other experts, to identify ways that electronic communication can impact the right to a fair trial and to recommend strategies to protect witnesses from intimidation and jurors from compromising their independence. The panel proceedings and recommendations are presented in this report. Key Findings Judges Should Have Authority to Use Their Own Discretion to Find Solutions for Their Courtrooms Legislation may help mitigate some of the problems introduced by electronic communication, but judges need discretion in their own courtrooms. Judges and attorneys need flexibility in engaging with jurors, who are used to communicating electronically throughout the day but must be limited during trial proceedings. Electronic Device Bans in the Courtroom Are Viewed as Effective in Mitigating Witness Intimidation However, jury sequestration to minimize or eliminate misconduct with electronic communication is considered to be generally impractical and counterproductive. More Public Education Would Clarify the Importance of Due Process and How Electronic and Social Media Communication May Violate the Constitutional Rights of Defendants and Other Parties to a Case Continuing education is also needed for the judiciary and court practitioners on evolving modes of electronic communication. Recommendations Undertake fundamental research on how the exploding volume of electronic data could affect the protection of rights. Develop methods to better assess the effect on the judicial process of jurors' "outside research" during trials. Identify approaches both to limit juror use of mobile devices to do "outside research" during trials and to educate jurors on this issue. Develop methods to monitor juror and defendant social media activity, given concerns about the use of social media to influence judicial processes. Details: Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2018. 19p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 25, 2018 at: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2155.html Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2155.html Shelf Number: 150365 Keywords: InternetJuriesOnline CommunicationsSocial MediaTrials |
Author: Hoekstra, Mark Title: The Effect of Own-Gender Juries on Conviction Rates Summary: This paper examines the extent to which criminal conviction rates are affected by the similarity in gender of the defendant and jury. To identify effects, we exploit random variation in both the assignment to jury pools and the ordering of potential jurors. We do so using detailed administrative data on the juror selection process and trial proceedings for two large counties in Florida. Results indicate that own-gender juries result in significantly lower conviction rates on drug charges, though we find no evidence of effects for other charges. Estimates indicate that a one standard deviation increase in expected own-gender jurors (~10 percentage points) results in an 18 percentage point reduction in conviction rates on drug charges, which is highly significant even after adjusting for multiple comparisons. This results in a 13 percentage point decline in the likelihood of being sentenced to at least some jail time. These findings highlight how drawing an opposite-gender jury can impose significant costs on defendants, and demonstrate that own-gender bias can occur even in settings where the importance of being impartial is actively pressed on participants. Details: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2018. 37p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 12, 2018 at: http://www.nber.org/papers/w25013 Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w25013.pdf Shelf Number: 151480 Keywords: Conviction Rates Gender Juries |