•  
  •  
 

Document Type

Article

Media Type

Text

Abstract

Many jury trial procedures and practices are left to "the sound discretion of the trial court." This discretion provides judges with flexibility to meet the individual needs of each trial. Using information from the State-of-the-States Survey of Jury Improvement Efforts, this article documents the extent to which trial judges exercise that discretion with respect to trial procedures and practices designed to improve jury comprehension, performance, and satisfaction. It describes legal, cultural, and case-specific factors that contribute to jurisdictional variation in the use of these procedures and practices, including judicial non-compliance with prohibited and mandatory practices. Finally, it discusses whether judicial non-compliance with procedural prohibitions and mandates amounts to a form of judicial nullification and, if so, whether it serves the same purpose as jury nullification (e.g., as a check on judicial, executive, and legislative excesses).

First Page

407

Last Page

424

Publication Date

7-1-2008

Department

Other

ISSN

0734-1490

Language

eng

Publisher

Northern Illinois University Law Review

Included in

Law Commons

Share

COinS
 
 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.