Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Trial Handbook
Trial Handbook
FOR TRIAL
JURORS
SERVING IN
THE
UNITED STATES
DISTRICT
COURTS
Prepared for the use of trial jurors
serving in the United States district courts
under the supervision of the Judicial
Conference of the United States. Published
by the Administrative Office of the
United States Courts, Washington, D.C.
20544. www.uscourts.gov
CONTENTS
1
duty faithfully, honorably, and well. In addition
to determining and adjusting property rights,
jurors may also be asked to decide questions
involving a crime for which a person may
be fined, placed on probation, or confined
in prison. In a very real sense, therefore, the
people must rely on jurors for the protection
of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
THE COURTS
In this country, there are two systems of
courts. They are the courts of the individual
50 states and the District of Columbia and the
courts of the Federal Government. This book is
written for jurors selected to serve in the trial
court of the Federal Government, the United
States District Court. The types of cases that
can be brought in this court have been fixed
by the United States Congress according to our
Federal Constitution.
Cases in the United States District Courts
are divided into two general classes. These are
called criminal cases and civil cases.
Criminal cases are those in which
individuals or organizations are charged with
breaking the criminal laws. Typical criminal
charges in a federal court are those involving
violation of the federal income tax and
narcotics laws, mail theft, and counterfeiting.
Civil cases are suits in which persons who
disagree over their rights and duties come into
court to settle the matter. A typical example of
a civil case is one involving a broken contract.
One party may claim that it should be paid
under the terms of the contract, while the
other side may assert a defense to the claim,
such as the lack of a binding contract. The
court is asked to decide who is right. This
depends on the law as laid down by the judge
and the facts as decided by the jury.
2
THE CRIMINAL CASE
The person charged with a violation of the
law is the defendant. The charge against the
defendant may be brought in two ways. One
way is by means of an indictment; the other is
by an information.
An indictment is a written accusation by
a grand jury that charges the defendant with
committing an offense against the law. Each
offense charged will usually be set forth in a
separate count of the indictment.
An information is the name given to a
written charge against the defendant filed
by the United States Attorney and not by
the grand jury. But even in cases where the
defendant has the right to have a grand jury
consider the charges presented, the defendant
may agree to give up this right and consent to
the filing of an information.
After the indictment or information is
filed, the defendant appears in open court
where the court advises the defendant of the
charge and asks whether the defendant pleads
“guilty” or “not guilty.” This procedure is
called the arraignment.
No trial is needed if the defendant pleads
guilty and admits to committing the crime. But
if the defendant pleads not guilty, he or she
will then be placed on trial.
The judge in a criminal case tells the jury
what the law is. The jury must determine what
the true facts are. On that basis, the jury has
only to determine whether the defendant is
guilty or not guilty of each offense charged.
The subsequent sentencing is the sole
responsibility of the judge. In other words, in
arriving at an impartial verdict as to guilt or
innocence of a jury defendant, the jury is not
to consider a sentence.
3
The jury must consider separately each of
the charges against the defendant, after which
it may find the person: not guilty of any of the
charges, guilty of all the charges, or guilty of
some of the charges and not guilty of others.
4
process is called the voir dire. This is an
examination conducted by the judge and
sometimes includes participation by counsel.
A deliberately untruthful answer to any fair
question could result in serious punishment to
the person making it.
The voir dire examination opens with a
short statement about the case. The purpose is
to inform the jurors what the case is about and
to identify the parties and their lawyers.
Questions are then asked to find out
whether any individuals on the panel have
any personal interest in the case or know
of any reason why they cannot render an
impartial verdict. The court also wants to
know whether any member of the panel is
related to or personally acquainted with the
parties, their lawyers, or the witnesses who
will appear during trial. Other questions will
determine whether any panel members have
a prejudice or a feeling that might influence
them in rendering a verdict. Any juror having
knowledge of the case should explain this to
the judge.
Parties on either side may ask that a
member of the panel be excused or exempted
from service on a particular jury. These
requests, or demands, are called challenges.
A person may be challenged for cause
if the examination shows he or she might be
prejudiced. The judge will excuse an individual
from the panel if the cause raised in the
challenge is sufficient. There is no limit to the
number of challenges for cause, which either
party may make.
The parties also have a right to a
certain number of challenges for which
no cause is necessary. These are called
peremptory challenges. Each side usually
has a predetermined number of peremptory
5
challenges. The peremptory challenge is a
legal right long recognized by law as a means
of giving both sides some choice in the make-
up of a jury. Jurors should clearly understand
that being eliminated from the jury panel by
a peremptory challenge is no reflection upon
their ability or integrity.
In some courts, the peremptory
challenges are made openly in the hearing
of the jury. In others, they are made from the
jury list out of the jury’s sight.
6
(2) The plaintiff calls witnesses and
produces evidence to prove its case.
(3) The defendant may call witnesses
and produce evidence to disprove
the plaintiffs’ case and to prove the
defendant’s claims.
(4) The plaintiff may call rebuttal
witnesses to disprove what was said
by the defendant’s witnesses.
(5) Closing arguments are made by the
lawyer on each side.
(6) The judge instructs or charges the
jury as to the law.
(7) The jury retires to deliberate.
(8) The jury reaches its verdict.
During the trial, witnesses called by either
side may be cross-examined by the lawyers on
the other side.
Throughout the trial, the judge may be
asked in the presence of the jury to decide
questions of law. Usually these questions
concern objections to testimony that either
side wants to present. Occasionally, the
judge may ask jurors to leave the courtroom
briefly while the lawyers present their legal
arguments for and against such objections.
The law requires that the judge decide such
questions.
A ruling by the judge does not indicate
that the judge is taking sides. He or she is
merely saying, in effect, that the law does,
or else does not, permit that question to be
asked.
It is possible that the judge may decide
every objection favorably to the plaintiff
or the defendant. That does not mean the
case should be decided by the jury for the
plaintiff or the defendant. Even where the
7
judge decides every objection favorably to
the plaintiff or the defendant, the jury should
maintain its objectivity and base its verdict
strictly upon the testimony and exhibits
received in evidence at trial.
The juror takes an oath to decide the case
“upon the law and the evidence.” The law is
what the presiding judge declares the law to
be; not what a juror believes it to be or what a
juror may have heard it to be from any source
other than the presiding judge. The evidence
that jurors consider consists of the testimony
of witnesses and the exhibits admitted in
evidence. What evidence is proper for the jury
to consider is based upon the law of evidence.
8
facts or some of the facts.
It is the jury’s duty to reach its own
conclusion based on the evidence. The verdict
is reached without regard to what may be the
opinion of the judge as to the facts, though as
to the law the judge’s charge controls.
The judge may point out and may also
explain basic facts in dispute, and facts that do
not actually matter in the case. In other words,
the judge may try to direct the jury’s attention
to the real merits of the case and impartially
summarize the evidence bearing on the
questions of fact. The judge will state the law
related to the facts presented to the jury.
COURTROOM ETIQUETTE
A court session begins when the court
official raps for order. Everyone in the court
rises. The judge takes his or her place on the
bench, and the court official announces the
opening of court. A similar procedure is used
when court adjourns.
Common courtesy and politeness are
safe guides as to the way jurors should act.
Of course, no juror will be permitted to read a
newspaper or magazine in the courtroom. Nor
should a juror carry on a conversation with
another juror in the courtroom during the trial.
Jurors will be treated with consideration
for their comfort and convenience. They
should bring to the attention of the judge
any matter affecting their service and should
9
notify the court of any emergencies. In the
event of a personal emergency, a juror may
send word to the judge through any court
personnel, or may ask to see the judge
privately.
10
Jurors are expected to use all the
experience, common sense, and common
knowledge they possess. But they are not to
rely on any private source of information.
Thus, they should be careful during the trial
not to discuss the case at home or elsewhere.
Information that a juror gets from a private
source may be only half true, or biased or
inaccurate. It may be irrelevant to the case at
hand. At any rate, it is only fair that the parties
have a chance to know and comment on all
the facts that matter in the case.
If during the trial a juror learns elsewhere
of some fact about the case, he or she should
inform the court. The juror should not
mention any such matter in the jury room.
Individual jurors should never inspect
(either in person or via Internet websites) the
scene of an accident or of any event in the
case. If an inspection is necessary, the judge
will have the jurors go as a group to the scene.
Jurors must not talk about the case
with others not on the jury, even their
spouses or families, including via electronic
communications and social networking on
computers, netbooks, tablets, and smart
phones. Jurors must not read about the
case in the newspapers or on the Internet.
They should avoid radio, television, and
Internet broadcasts that might mention the
case. Jurors should not conduct any outside
research, including but not limited to,
consulting dictionaries or reference materials,
whether in paper form or on the Internet.
Jurors may not use any of the following to
obtain information about the case, about
case processes or legal terms, or to conduct
any research about the case: any electronic
device or media, such as a telephone, cell
phone, smart phone, or computer; the
Internet, any Internet service, or any text
11
or instant messaging service, RSS feed, or
other automatic alert that may transmit
information regarding the case to the juror;
or any Internet chat room, blog, or website,
to communicate to anyone information about
the case. The Sixth Amendment’s guarantee
of a trial by an impartial jury requires that a
jury’s verdict must be based on nothing else
but the evidence and law presented to them
in court. The words of Supreme Court Justice
Oliver Wendell Holmes from over a century
ago apply with equal force to jurors serving
in this advanced technological age: “The
theory of our system is that the conclusions to
be reached in a case will be induced only by
evidence and argument in open court, and not
by any outside influence, whether of private
talk or public print.”
Breaking these rules is likely to confuse a
juror. It may be hard to separate in one’s mind
the court testimony and reports coming from
other sources.
Jurors should not loiter in the corridors
or vestibules of the courthouse. Embarrassing
and/or improper contacts may occur there
with persons interested in the case. If juror
identification badges are provided, they should
be worn in the courthouse at all times.
If any outsider attempts to talk with a
juror about a case in which he or she is sitting,
the juror should do the following:
(1) Tell the person it is improper for a
juror to discuss the case or receive
any information except in the
courtroom.
(2) Refuse to listen if the outsider
persists.
(3) Report the incident at once to the
judge.
12
Jurors have the duty to report to the judge
any improper behavior by any juror. They
also have the duty to inform the judge of any
outside communication or improper conduct
directed at the jury by any person.
Jurors on a case should refrain from
talking on any subject—even if it is not related
to the matter being tried—with any lawyer,
witness, or party in the case. Such contact
may make a new trial necessary, at significant
additional expense to the parties, the court,
and ultimately, taxpayers.
Some cases may arouse much public
discussion. In that event, the jury may be
kept together until the verdict is reached. This
procedure is used to protect the jurors against
outside influences.
13
consideration to the opinion of their fellow
jurors. They have an obligation to reach a
verdict whenever possible. However, no juror
is required to give up any opinion which he or
she is convinced is correct.
It would be dishonest for a judge to
decide a case by tossing a coin. It would be
just as dishonest for a juror to do so.
The members of the jury are sworn to
pass judgment on the facts in a particular case.
They have no concern beyond that case. They
violate their oath if they render their decision
on the basis of the effect their verdict may
have on other situations.
CONCLUSION
To decide cases correctly, jurors must be
honest and intelligent. They must have both
integrity and good judgment. The continued
vitality of the jury system depends on these
attributes.
To meet their responsibility, jurors must
decide the facts and apply the law impartially.
They must not favor the rich or the poor.
They must treat alike all men and women,
corporations and individuals. Justice should be
14
rendered to all persons without regard to race,
color, religion, or sex.
The performance of jury service is
the fulfillment of a high civic obligation.
Conscientious service brings its own reward
in the satisfaction of an important task well
done. There is no more valuable work that
the average citizen can perform in support
of our Government than the full and honest
discharge of jury duty.
The effectiveness of the democratic
system itself is largely measured by the
integrity, the intelligence, and the general
quality of citizenship of the jurors who serve in
our courts.
15
Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts
Thurgood Marshall Federal Judiciary Building
One Columbus Circle, N.E.
Washington, D.C. 20544
www.uscourts.gov