|
Strike For Cause
Strike for cause (also referred to as challenge for cause or removal for cause) is a method of eliminating potential members from a jury panel in the United States. During the jury selection process, after ''voir dire (; often ; from an Anglo-Norman term in common law meaning "to speak the truth") is a legal term for procedures during a trial that help a judge decide certain issues: * Prospective jurors are questioned to decide whether they can be fair and i ...'', opposing attorneys may request removal of any juror who does not appear capable of rendering a fair and impartial verdict, in either determining guilt or innocence and/or a suitable punishment.Arbetman, Lee P. & O'Brien, Edward L. ''Glencoe Street Law'', pg. 50,648. Glencoe/McGraw-Hill, New York, 2005. . An example would be a potential juror in a murder case, where the sentencing options include the death penalty and a lesser sentence (such as life without parole), who states that they "would sentence a defendant to ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Jury
A jury is a sworn body of people (jurors) convened to hear evidence, make Question of fact, findings of fact, and render an impartiality, impartial verdict officially submitted to them by a court, or to set a sentence (law), penalty or Judgment (law), judgment. Most trial juries are "petit juries", and consist of up to 15 people. A larger jury known as a grand jury has been used to investigate potential crimes and render indictments against suspects, and consists of between 16 and 23 jurors. The jury system developed in England during the Middle Ages and is a hallmark of the English common law system. Juries are commonly used in countries whose legal systems derive from the British Empire, such as the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Australia, and Republic of Ireland, Ireland. They are not used in most other countries, whose legal systems are based upon European Civil law (legal system), civil law or Islamic sharia, sharia law, although their use has been spreading. ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Jury Selection
Jury selection is the selection of the people who will serve on a jury during a jury trial. The group of potential jurors (the "jury pool,” also known as the ''venire'') is first selected from among the community using a reasonably random method. Jury lists are compiled from voter registrations and driver license or ID renewals. From those lists, summonses are mailed. A panel of jurors is then assigned to a courtroom. The prospective jurors are randomly selected to sit in the jury box. At this stage, they will be questioned in court by the judge and/or attorneys in the United States. Depending on the jurisdiction, attorneys may have an opportunity to mount a ''challenge for cause'' argument or use one of a limited number of peremptory challenges. In some jurisdictions that have capital punishment, the jury must be death-qualified to remove those who are opposed to the death penalty. Jury selection and techniques for ''voir dire'' are taught to law students in trial advocacy ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Voir Dire
(; often ; from an Anglo-Norman term in common law meaning "to speak the truth") is a legal term for procedures during a trial that help a judge decide certain issues: * Prospective jurors are questioned to decide whether they can be fair and impartial. * Witnesses are questioned to decide their competence to testify. * Witnesses are questioned to decide the admissibility of evidence. Etymology From Old French ' "true" (from Latin ' "true," from Proto-Indo-European language">PIE root ''*were-o-'' "true, trustworthy") and from Old French ' "to say" (from Latin ' "speak, tell, say," from PIE root ''*deik-'' "to show," also "pronounce solemnly"). It originally referred to an oath taken by jurors to tell the truth (). It comes from the Anglo-Norman language. Historic use In earlier centuries, a Peremptory challenge, challenge to a particular juror would be tried by other members of the jury panel, and the challenged juror would take an oath of ''voir dire'', meaning to tell ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Peremptory Challenge
The right of peremptory challenge is a legal right in jury selection for the attorneys to reject a certain number of potential jurors or judges without stating a reason. The idea behind peremptory challenges is that if both parties have contributed in the configuration of the jury, they will find its verdict more acceptable. The use of peremptory challenges is controversial as some feel it has been used to undermine the balanced representation on a jury which would occur using random selection. Many jurisdictions limit or prohibit peremptory challenges. Description In law, the right of peremptory challenge is a right in jury selection for the attorneys to reject a certain number of potential jurors without stating a reason. Other potential jurors may be challenged for cause, i.e. by giving a good reason why they might be unable to reach a fair verdict, but the challenge will be considered by the presiding judge and may be denied. A peremptory challenge can be a major part of ''vo ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Batson Challenge
''Batson v. Kentucky'', 476 U.S. 79 (1986), was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court ruling that a prosecutor's use of a peremptory challenge in a criminal case—the dismissal of jurors without stating a valid cause for doing so—may not be used to exclude jurors based solely on their race. The Court ruled that this practice violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The case gave rise to the term ''Batson challenge'', an objection to a peremptory challenge based on the standard established by the Supreme Court's decision in this case. Subsequent jurisprudence has resulted in the extension of ''Batson'' to civil cases ('' Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Company'') and cases where jurors are excluded on the basis of sex ('' J.E.B. v. Alabama ex rel. T.B.''). The principle had been established previously by several state courts, including the California Supreme Court in 1978, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court in 1979, and t ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
American Legal Terminology
American(s) may refer to: * American, something of, from, or related to the United States of America, commonly known as the "United States" or "America" ** Americans, citizens and nationals of the United States of America ** American ancestry, people who self-identify their ancestry as "American" ** American English, the set of varieties of the English language native to the United States ** Native Americans in the United States, indigenous peoples of the United States * American, something of, from, or related to the Americas, also known as "America" ** Indigenous peoples of the Americas * American (word), for analysis and history of the meanings in various contexts Organizations * American Airlines, U.S.-based airline headquartered in Fort Worth, Texas * American Athletic Conference, an American college athletic conference * American Recordings (record label), a record label that was previously known as Def American * American University, in Washington, D.C. Sports teams ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Civil Procedure
Civil procedure is the body of law that sets out the rules and regulations along with some standards that courts follow when adjudicating civil lawsuits (as opposed to procedures in criminal law matters). These rules govern how a lawsuit or case may be commenced; what kind of service of process (if any) is required; the types of pleadings or statements of case, motions or applications, and orders allowed in civil cases; the timing and manner of depositions and discovery or disclosure; the conduct of trials; the process for judgment; the process for post-trial procedures; various available remedies; and how the courts and clerks must function. Differences from criminal procedure In most cases, criminal prosecutions are pursued by the state in order to punish offenders, although some systems, such as in English and French law, allow citizens to bring a private prosecution. Conversely, civil actions are initiated by private individuals, companies or organizations, for t ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Criminal Procedure
Criminal procedure is the adjudication process of the criminal law. While criminal procedure differs dramatically by jurisdiction, the process generally begins with a formal criminal charge with the person on trial either being free on bail or incarcerated, and results in the conviction or acquittal of the defendant. Criminal procedure can be either in form of inquisitorial or adversarial criminal procedure. Basic rights Currently, in many countries with a democratic system and the rule of law, criminal procedure puts the burden of proof on the prosecution – that is, it is up to the prosecution to prove that the defendant is guilty beyond any reasonable doubt, as opposed to having the defense prove that they are innocent, and any doubt is resolved in favor of the defendant. This provision, known as the presumption of innocence, is required, for example, in the 46 countries that are members of the Council of Europe, under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
