Document Type

Working Paper

Publication Date

10-3-2007

SSRN Discipline

*Humanities - Forthcoming Areas; Religious Studies Research Network; Litigation, Procedure & Dispute Resolution eJournals; LSN Subject Matter eJournals; delete2; Economics Research Network; Legal Scholarship Network; PRN Subject Matter eJournals; Criminal Law & Procedure eJournals; Philosophy Research Network; Law School Research Papers - Legal Studies; Law & Society eJournals; Law School Research Papers - Public Law & Legal Theory; Humanities Network; Political Science Network

Abstract

Americas courts summons millions of our citizens to serve as jurors each year The number of citizens responding to those summonses is dropping and in some courts the number of nonresponders is reaching a critical level Task forces have been created to address this problem but their reports rarely discuss the intrusive nature of and overreliance on jury questionnairesThe selection of a jury is of course an essential part of a trial and jury questionnaires when properly used can make that process more effective and expeditious This Article examines the use of juror questionnaires in the courtsThe Article identifies and separates the four approaches to the use of jury questionnaires and analyzes the pros and cons of those schemes It focuses principally on the more expansive intrusive form of questionnaires which is directed more toward information gathering than jury qualificationQuestionnaires are used in virtually all highprofile cases such as the Exxon Valdez oil spill and the criminal prosecutions of Robert Blake Kobe Bryant Michael Jackson Timothy McVeigh Zacarias Moussaoui Scott Peterson OJ Simpson and Martha Stewart among many others The practice of using questionnaires in both civil and criminal litigation though is not limited to highprofile cases Some courts rather routinely use jury questionnaires but the intrusive voir dire questioning and the highly discretionary use of jury questionnaires probably play a significant role in the reluctance of citizens to report for jury dutyThis Article suggests that questionnaires may not contribute as much as their proponents contend and may impose more costs than proponents tally It also exposes some of the real but underrecognized costs of the expansive use of jury questionnairesThe Article argues that the use of jury questionnaires must be better controlled and offers specific concrete suggestions for mending the current system such as discouraging the use of generic questionnaires limiting their use to specific cases based on need and properly protecting sensitive information about prospective jurors

Download

Share

COinS