Jury Trial. Defendant in a Federal Criminal Prosecution Cannot Waive His Constitutional Right to a Unanimous Jury Verdict

1953 ◽  
Vol 39 (8) ◽  
pp. 1101 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Jury Trial ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Jury Verdict ◽  
Constitutional Right

Getting to (not) guilty: examining jurors' deliberative processes in, and beyond, the context of a mock rape trial

Legal Studies ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 74-97 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louise Ellison ◽  
Vanessa E Munro
Keyword(s):  
Practical Significance ◽  
Jury Trial ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
England And Wales ◽  
The Public ◽  
Trial Process ◽  
Future Improvement ◽  
Rape Trial ◽  
Deliberative Processes ◽  
Insight Into

In England and Wales, trial by jury is typically reserved for more serious offences and is by no means the norm of criminal prosecution. Despite this, the jury continues to hold enormous symbolic and practical significance. In a context in which research with ‘real’ juries is prohibited, this paper outlines the findings of a mock study in which members of the public deliberated towards a unanimous verdict, having observed an abbreviated rape trial reconstruction. It reflects on the structural processes (including the use of narrative, the presence of a foreperson and group/inter-personal dynamics) that framed the tone and direction of discussions. In so doing, it generates insight into what may go on behind the closed doors of the jury room in rape cases and – more broadly – highlights the ways in which differently composed juries, when faced with the same scenario, may reach divergent verdicts or embark on radically different routes to reach the same destination. In addition, it explores the extent to which participants, having been directed on appropriate legal tests and burdens of proof, were able to understand and apply these standards; and it reflects on the implications of this in terms of future improvement of the jury trial process, both in rape cases and beyond.

scholarly journals CRIMINAL PROSECUTION OF TERRORIST CRIMES IN JURY TRIAL: LEGALITY AND APPROPRIATENESS

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (5) ◽  
pp. 674-677 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zyufyar Shakirovich Gataullin ◽  
Alexander Yurevich Epihin ◽  
Oleg Aleksandrovich Zaitsev ◽  
Ekaterina Pavlovna Grishina ◽  
Andrey Viktorovich Mishin
Keyword(s):  
Statistical Data ◽  
Jury Trial ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Legal Proceedings ◽  
Constitutional State ◽  
Analysis And Synthesis ◽  
Teachers And Students ◽  
The Right

Purpose: Scientific views of processualists concerning Institute of jurors are given in the article. Some experts defend activity of jury, others - categorically against such form of legal proceedings. Methodology: The methodological basis of this research is made by a dialectic method. Special methods of knowledge were used: logic-legal; comparative, historical, sociological, system and structural, statistical, method of the analysis and synthesis, legal modeling. Result: On the basis of the analysis of statistical data and materials of jurisprudence the author's position of rather a criminal prosecution in court with the participation of jurors on criminal cases of terrorist orientation, in the conditions of absence at defendants of the right to petition on such court is stated. The need for differentiation of legality and expediency of restriction, constitutional rights of defendants on the jury is proved. The concrete measures directed to an increase in efficiency of criminal prosecution in the conditions of the constitutional state are proposed. Results of a poll of practical workers are given: investigators, prosecutors, and judges who spoke in favor of the made offers directed to an increase in efficiency of criminal legal proceedings. Applications: This research can be used for the universities, teachers, and students. Novelty/Originality: In this research, the model of Criminal Prosecution of Terrorist Crimes in Jury Trial: Legality and Appropriateness is presented in a comprehensive and complete manner.

scholarly journals THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO A JURY TRIAL AND A FAST TRIAL: THE EXPERIENCE OF THE UNITED STATES

2021 ◽  
pp. 11-13
Author(s):  
V.V. Berch
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Direct Democracy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Jury Trial ◽  
Professional Activity ◽  
The People ◽  
Administration Of Justice ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
The Right ◽  
Speedy Trial

The article is devoted to the consideration of the constitutional right to a trial by a jury, as well as the right to a speedy trial in accordance with the provisions of the Sixth Amendment to the US Constitution. It is noted that as of today in Ukraine there is a question of ensuring the actual (real) participation of the people in the administration of justice and the creation of an appropriate mechanism for the realization of such a right of the people. It is established that the permanent evolution of the jury trial in the world as a full-fledged element of participatory democracy allows us to assert the possibility of applying the best foreign experience in this area and for Ukraine. It is noted that the jury trial, which is typical for the United States, is undoubtedly a consequence of the borrowing of English legal customs, but has its own special features. It has been established that the right to a speedy trial should be distinguished from other constitutional rights, as it concerns the interests of society and the justice system more than the interests of the accused. The circumstances that suggest whether a trial is in fact "fast" are rather vague, as each such proceeding is to some extent unique. The requirements for members of the jury are set out in the Jury Selection Act. It is noted that the release of jurors varies depending on the state. One of the grounds for such dismissal is professional activity. For example, doctors, lawyers, public figures, police or firefighters. At the same time, this practice is gradually ceasing to be natural. It is concluded that the jury trial as a form of public participation in the administration of justice is undoubtedly a democratic legal institution. Direct democracy in the exercise of judicial power, which is carried out in compliance with the principles of publicity and adversarial proceedings promotes the establishment of citizens' faith in the fairness of judicial decisions.  

Exercise of the Right of Citizens to Participate in the Administration of Justice: Possible Ways of Reforming in the Criminal Process

2021 ◽  
pp. 69-75
Author(s):  
Veronika V. Yaselskaya ◽  
◽  
Alena V. Grishchenko ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Jury Trial ◽  
District Courts ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
Administration Of Justice ◽  
Long Time ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
Soviet Russia ◽  
The One ◽  
The Right

The Constitution of the Russian Federation considers the jury as a form of citizens’ participation in the administration of justice, though it was not widely accepted for a long time. Recreated in the early 1990s, the jury trial suffered from limited powers. Subsequently, the range of criminal cases within its jurisdiction became even more limited. The jury expanded its jurisdiction when introduced to district courts in June 1, 2018. On the one hand, the expanded jurisdiction of the jury improves activities of the court and other participants in the criminal process. On the other hand, the changes did not result in the effective exercise of the right of citizens to participate in the administration of justice, which suggests the necessity of the jury’s further expansion. Since it is difficult not to ensure the participation of the jury in minor and medium gravity cases, the increase in the number of cases brought before a jury should occur at the expense of certain types of grave and especially grave crimes. The expansion of the jury competence on grave and especially grave crimes will not be a final solution to the problem of involving citizens in the administration of justice. In contrast to Soviet Russia, where popular representatives (lay judges) exercised control over the judges in all criminal cases at first instance, today, in most cases, justice is administered by judges alone. The people’s court has advantages over the sole consideration of the case, as it ensures open justice, increases the responsibility of professional participants in the process, and raises the prestige of performing judicial functions. It is possible to return lay judges to district courts for non-grave and medium-grave cases implying custodial punishment. Thus, the effective implementation of the constitutional right of citizens to participate in the administration of justice can be achieved through various forms. Expanding the jury’s competence at the expense of certain types of grave and especially grave crimes, the introduction of lay judges for non-grave and medium-grave crimes implying custodial punishment will promote a broader participation of citizens in the administration of justice.

scholarly journals Certain issues of exercising the right of citizens to participate in administration of criminal justice in the Russian Federation at the current stage

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Albina Olegovna Shikhovtsova
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Population Increase ◽  
Jury Trial ◽  
Democratic State ◽  
Administration Of Justice ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
The Right

The object of this research is the constitutional framework of the institution of citizens’ participation in administration of justice, viewed as the fundamental principles of relationship between the democratic state and its citizens. Participation of citizens in court as lay judges is of constitutional nature. One of the forms of citizen’s participation in administration of criminal justice in particular is the jury trial. The goal of this research consists in the analysis of certain aspects of mechanism of exercising the right of citizens to participate in administration of criminal justice in the Russian Federation, as well as in development of recommendations for its improvement.  Leaning on the dialectical, systematic, formal-legal, comparative-legal, structural-functional and sociological methods, the author analyzes the current situation pertinent of exercising by the citizens of the Russian Federation of the constitutional right to participate in administration of justice, and substantiated the feasibility of measures for creating conditions for the more active implementation of such right in the area of criminal justice. The author reveals the reasons of passive attitude of the citizens of the Russian Federation towards implementation of their constitutional right to participate in administration of justice as jury, and concludes on the need for taking certain measures on the federal level aimed at attraction of citizens in administration of justice: increase of the legal culture of population, increase of the level of information awareness of the citizens about the jury trial; revision of legal regulation of the procedure of formation of the jury.

scholarly journals Person(s) of Interest and Missing Women: Legal Abandonment in the Downtown Eastside

2014 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elaine Craig
Keyword(s):  
Public Discourse ◽  
Analytical Framework ◽  
Jury Trial ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Collective Violence ◽  
Supreme Court Of Canada ◽  
Downtown Eastside ◽  
And Gender ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Robert Pickton

The criminal prosecution of Robert Pickton involved an eleven-month jury trial, two appeals to the British Columbia Court of Appeal, an appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada, and seventy-six reported judicial rulings. This article, through a combination of discursive and doctrinal analyses of these seventy-six decisions, examines what was (not) achieved by the Pickton trial. It discusses three areas: the judicial representation of the women Pickton was prosecuted for murdering; the implications of the jury’s verdict in the Pickton proceedings; and the impact of the Pickton trial on the families of the women he murdered. The article starts from the premise that it is correct to characterize these murders as a product of collective violence. Colonialism, political and legal infrastructure, and public discourse—and hegemonies based on race, class, and gender that these processes, institutions, and practices hold in place—produced a particular class of vulnerable women, the police who failed them, and Robert Pickton. The article concludes by suggesting that the outcomes of the Pickton prosecution both highlight the limitations of the criminal justice system and offer an analytical framework for examining other institutional responses (such as the Missing Women’s Inquiry) to the kind of collective violence that gave rise to the Pickton circumstance.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document