Latest Edition of the Jur-E Bulletin

State of Iowa v. Kevin Plain, Sr.

On June 30, the Iowa Supreme Court decided State of Iowa v. Kevin Plain, Sr.  Factually, an all-white jury in Black Hawk County convicted the defendant, a black man, of one count of harassment in the first degree, an aggravated misdemeanor. On appeal, the defendant raises several claims of error, including that the trial court erred in using only the absolute disparity method for assessing the representativeness of a jury pool when considering whether the racial composition of the jury pool violated the defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to an impartial jury. There were two holdings in the case. 

First, the court held that criminal defendants have a constitutional right to get access to jury selection records, even when there’s no statute that provides for such access. (“Defendants are entitled to access the information needed to enforce their constitutional right to a jury trial by a representative cross-section of the

community.”)

Second, the court overruled a previous decision that had identified the absolute disparity test as the exclusive test for measuring an alleged fair cross-section violation. (“After surveying the various tests, and bearing in mind the practical problems associated with the use of the absolute disparity test in Iowa, we conclude it is no longer appropriate to rely exclusively upon the disparity test as an indicator of representativeness.”).  The Iowa Supreme Court concluded:

        We conditionally affirm Plain’s conviction and remand for development of the record on his Sixth Amendment challenge. On remand, the State shall provide the defendant reasonable access to the records necessary to evaluate whether African-Americans were systematically underrepresented in the jury pool from which the jurors were selected for Plain’s trial. Following development of the record on this issue, the district court shall reconsider Plain’s claim that his jury did not represent a fair cross-section of the community.

(Thanks to Professor Nina Chernoff for suggesting this case for inclusion in this week’s newsletter.)

 

Jurors’ Predjudices and Confusion

 

Randy Lee Loftis, a journalism lecturer at the University of North Texas and a former reporter published an opinion piece in the Dallas Morning News on July 25, 2017, titled Jurors’ Predjudices and Confusions are a Window on Society.  Professor Loftis covered many trials as a reporter and served on four juries.  He describes situations during which specific jurors have a significant amount of difficulty deciding cases without basing their decision on their own preconceived views of witnesses or facts.  This is a well written and insightful article.  He concludes:

 

After watching thousands of my fellow Americans in courtrooms as a reporter, and deliberating with dozens of them in locked jury rooms, I've concluded that the only solutions to ill-equipped jurors are obvious but hard: Nurturing skills in our schools, homes, politics and culture. Telling fact from feeling, evidence from argument, and science from sophistry. Learning to gag when fed public poisons.

 

Arrested Then Selected for Jury Service

The New York Daily News reported on July 26, 2017 that summoned juror Dinorah Preyor was arrested when she entered the Queens, NY Criminal Court for jury service.  She was allegedly carrying a collapsible baton.  She was charged with the misdemeanor offense of possession of a weapon and issued a citation.  The court was aware of the incident and neither party objected to her continued participation in the jury selection process.  She was ultimately selected to hear a sexual assault of a child case.  Dennis Quick, the president of the New York State Officers Association said:

 

How can you take someone who was just arrested and think they’re going to be an impartial member of the jury?  You know she is going to find the defendant not guilty.

 

Protruding Nails in the Jury Box
 

The Baltimore Brew published a story on July 18, 2017 in which it describe inadequate seating for prospective jurors at the Clarence M. Mitchell Jr. Courthouse in Baltimore. More specifically, a few of the seats had cushions that were placed over protruding nails. One juror had to be sent home because his pants were ripped.  The problem has now been resolved.  The comments left by members of the public following the article are both funny and interesting.

Nominations for the 2017 G. Thomas Munsterman Award Are Being Accepted Now

Nominations for the G. Thomas Munsterman Award are currently being accepted through August 16, 2017, and can be sent by email to Greg Hurley at ghurley@ncsc.org.  Please download, complete and submit this form with your nomination.

About the Award

The award is named for G. Thomas Munsterman, founder and former director of the Center for Jury Studies and an internationally renowned innovator in jury systems and research. First presented in 2008, the award was established to recognize states, local courts, individuals, or other organizations that have made significant improvements or innovations in jury procedures, operations, or practices in one of the following categories:

• state or local statutes, rules, or other formal changes
• jury management or technology
• in-court improvements
• other improvements or innovations