In the upcoming semester, I will be conducting a Directed Reading with a group of law students on the American Jury. From time to time, I plan to blog about what we are discussing and hopefully receive input from the blogosphere. For example, in this post I am providing a draft syllabus. I am interested in receiving feedback on the structure of the Directed Reading. In addition, I would like to know what topics should receive more or less coverage. Ultimately, I hope to turn this Directed Reading (depending on how it goes) into a 2-3 credit upper level course.
Directed Reading on the American Jury
Week 1: History of the Jury Trial
Alschuler and Deiss, A Brief History of the American Criminal Jury in the United States, 61 U. Chicago L. Rev. 867 (1994)
VI and VII amendments of the U.S. Constitution
Week 2: Right to a Jury Trial
Duncan v. Louisiana, 391 U.S. 145 (1968)
Singer v. United States, 380 U.S. 24 (1965)
McKeiver v. Pennsylvania, 403 U.S. 528 (1971)
Week 3: Composition of Juries
Duren v. Missouri, 439 U.S. 357 (1979)
Taylor v. Louisiana, 419 U.S. 522 (1975)
Brief to the Supreme Court of the United States Berghuis v. Smith
Hoffman, Peremptory Challenges Should Be Abolished, 64 U. Chi. L. Rev. 809 (1997)
Week 4: Voir Dire
Ristaino v. Ross, 424 U.S. 589 (1976)
Jones, Judge vs. Attorney Conducted Voir Dire: An Empirical Investigation of Juror Candor, 11 Law and Human Behavior 73 (2002)
Mize, On Better Jury Selection: Spotting UFO Jurors Before They Enter the Jury Room, 36 Ct. Rev. 10 (Spring 1999)
Week 5: Juror Privacy
King, Nameless Justice: The Case for Routine Use of Anonymous Juries in Criminal Trials, 49 Vanderbilt L. Rev. 123 (1996)
Press Enterprise Co. v. Superior Court of California, 464 U.S. 501 (1984) (Press I)
Ohio House of Representatives Bill H.B. 327
Week 6: Deliberations
Ballew v. Georgia, 435 U.S. 223 (1978)
Allen v. United States, 164 U.S. 492 (1896)
Pennington and Hastie: A Cognitive Theory of Juror Decision Making: The Story Model, 13 Cardozo Law Review
May, “What Do We Do Now?” Helping Juries Apply the Instructions, 28 Loyola L.A. L. Rev. 869 (1995).
Week 7: Juror Misconduct
Gershman, The Problem of Juror Misconduct, 50 South Dakota Law Review 322 (2005)
Tanner v. United States, 483 U.S. 107 (1987)
The case of Ryan Widmer (freeryanwidmer.com) and FRE 606(b)
Week 8: Jury Verdicts
Apodaca v. Oregon, 406 U.S. 404 (1972)
Bray, Not Proven: Introducing a Third Verdict, 72 UCHILR 1299 (2005)
Cahill, Punishment Decisions at Conviction: Recognizing the Jury as Fault-Finder, 2005 UCHILF 91 (2005)
Week 9: Juror Nullification
Hans, Nullification at Work? A Glimpse from the NCSC Study of Hung Juries, 78 CHICRLR 1249 (2003)
Butler, Racially Based Jury Nullification: Black Power in the Criminal Justice System, 105 Yale L. J. 677 (1995)
Read the “Juror’s Handbook” at www.fija.org
Week 10: Jurors and the Death Penalty
Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002)
King, How Different is Death, Jury Sentencing in Capital and Non-Capital Cases Compared, 2 Ohio St. J. Crim. L. 195 (2004)
Week 11: Foreign Juries and Other Forms of Lay Participation
Weber, The New Japanese Jury System: Empowering the Public, Preserving Continental Justice, 4 EASIALR 125 (2009)
Holland, Improving Criminal Jury Verdicts: Learning From the Court Martial, 97 JCRLC 101 (2006)
Weeks 12-13: Jury Reform and the Future of Juries
Amar, Reinventing Juries: Ten Suggested Reforms, 28 U.C. Davis L. Rev. 1169 (1995)
Dees, Juries: On the Verge of Extinction? A Discussion of Jury Reform, 54 SMULR 1755 (2001)
Ramirez, Affirmative Jury Selection, 1998 U. Chicago. L. Rev. Forum 161 (1998)
Powell, Three Angry Men: Juries in International Criminal Adjudication, 79 NYULR 2341 (2004)
Week 14: Presentations
Students after conducting research on a particular jury-related topic will either make a presentation or turn in a paper.
