In truth, I don't see much reason for any peremptory challenges. I understand that occasionally there's something about a certain juror that seems a bit off, even though no cause can be stated, so I wouldn't object with keeping a couple of such challenges. And even 4-5 when you're talking about a capital case. But the number in this case was just too high. If there's a reason to dismiss a juror, then by all means dismiss him/her. But if there's no reason, then forget it -- seat the individual and move on. This would save the court time (shorter time necessary to interview the potential jurors, etc.) and make jury selection much more efficient. And of course, it would balance out, since both sides would lose their peremptories. It made me curious about other states, so I googled some, to see how many peremptory challenges they get:
- Arizona: 10 for a capital case, 6 for other felonies, 2 for misdemeanors
- California: 20 for a capital case, 10 for most criminal cases, 6 for criminal cases punishable by less than 90 days in jail
- Florida: 10 for capital cases, 6 for other felonies, 3 for misdemeanors
- Georgia: 20/10 for capital cases, 12/6 for other felonies (first number is for defendants, second is for prosecution)
- Oregon: 12 for capital cases, 6 for other felonies, 3 for misdemeanors
- Pennsylvania: where there is a single defendant, 20 for a capital case, 7 for other felonies, and 5 for misdemeanors
- Texas: 15 for capital cases, 10 for other felonies, 3 for misdemeanors
- Wisconsin: 6 for life imprisonment cases (like DC, they have no capital punishment), 4 for other crimes
2 comments:
Who makes these decisions (for DC)? Congress?
Not sure who, but not Congress. It would either be the court system or the Mayor/DC Council. If the latter, I believe Congress could "veto" it, but almost certainly wouldn't.
Post a Comment