Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Criminal Procedure — Juror bias

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//August 22, 2012//

Criminal Procedure — Juror bias

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//August 22, 2012//

Listen to this article

Criminal Procedure — Juror bias

Even though two jurors expressed concern about the defendant’s taking notes during voir dire, it was not an abuse of discretion for the district court to decline to empanel a new jury.

“As an initial matter, neither note conveyed that anyone was afraid of the defendant: one note simply expressed ‘concerns,’ and the other asked whether the jurors should be afraid. In United States v. McAnderson, a juror asked if the jurors taking public transportation could be walked to the bus depot, given the severe accusations in the case. 914 F.2d 934, 943 (7th
Cir. 1990). We held that the note ‘does not in any way demonstrate that the defendants’ jury was less than fair and impartial,’ and we observed that the use of the term ‘accusations’ instead of ‘crimes’ indicated that the jurors were sufficiently impartial. Id. Similarly, the jurors in this case all confirmed that they had not prejudged the defendant, and the jurors who had written the notes clarified that they were concerned with the procedure and were not afraid of the defendant.

Further, the district court took several remedial steps to insure that the jury had not prejudged Howard. The court explained the importance of note-taking, questioned the jurors individually, asked the notes’ authors whether they were afraid of Howard, and allowed the parties to question the jurors. The jurors individually confirmed that they had not prejudged Howard. ‘[W]e credit jurors’ affirmation of impartiality, [a]bsent any reasons to suspect as untrue the jurors’ claims of ability to remain impartial . . . .’ Lott, 442 F.3d at 984 (quoting
United States v. Moutry, 46 F.3d 598, 603 (7th Cir. 1995)).

Finding no reason to question the jurors’ claims of impartiality, we hold that the district court acted well within its ‘sound discretion’ when it denied Howard’s motion to empanel a new jury.”

Affirmed.

11-2495 U.S. v. Howard

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Guzman, J., Flaum, J.

Full Text

Polls

What kind of stories do you want to read more of?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests