<< Rich People in Prison | Main | News Scan >>


Jury Deliberations

| 0 Comments
Today the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in a civil case that criminal law practitioners should be aware of.  The Question Presented in Warger v. Shauers, No. 13-517 is:

Whether Federal Rule of Evidence 606(b) permits a party moving for a new trial based on juror dishonesty during voir dire to introduce juror testimony about statements made during deliberations that tend to show the alleged dishonesty.
This rule applies to civil and criminal cases alike.  Although a U.S. Supreme Court opinion on the Federal Rules of Evidence is binding precedent only in federal courts, we can expect it to be strongly persuasive in state courts as well, especially in states that have copied the federal rules.

Update:  Adam Liptak covers the argument for the NYT:

After a truncated and unusually one-sided argument, the Supreme Court on Wednesday appeared unlikely to allow jurors to testify about their deliberations, even to expose dishonesty during jury selection.

Leave a comment

Monthly Archives