James Moore is a personal injury trial attorney.
In the late 1600s, English judges served at the pleasure of the King and were often not impartial. English judges won independence from the Crown in the Act of Settlement 1701. Judges in the Colonies, however, still served at the pleasure of the King. King George III of Great Britain abolished jury trials in the Colonies. The desire for jury trials was one of the factors leading to the American Revolution.
The United States Declaration of Independence was adopted in 1776. The second section lists charges against King George III, one of which is “For depriving us in many cases, the benefits of Trial by Jury.”
Thomas Jefferson said in 1789, “I consider trial by jury as the only anchor ever yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its constitution.”
Likewise, Thomas Jefferson stated, “To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions is a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy.”
In 1789, Thomas Jefferson said, “The new Constitution has secured these [individual rights] in the Executive and Legislative departments: but not in the Judiciary. It should have established trials by the people themselves, that is to say, by jury.”
John Jay, the first Chief Justices of the United States Supreme Court, stated in 1789, “The jury has a right to judge both the law as well as the fat in controversy.”
The Bill of Rights added the first 10 Amendments to the Constitution in 1791
Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.
Amendment VII
In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
Jury trials provide a check on the power of the government. John Adams explained, “As the Constitution requires that the popular branch of the legislature should have an absolute check, so as to put a peremptory negative upon every act of the government, it requires that the common people, should have as complete a control, as decisive a negative, in every judgment of a court of judicature.”
Juries protect against runaway judges. Thomas Jefferson explained, “We all know that permanent judges acquire an esprit de corps; that, being known, they are liable to be tempted by bribery; that they are misled by favor, by relationship, by a spirit of party, by a devotion to the executive or legislative; that is better to leave a cause to the decision of cross and pile [coin flipping] than to that of a judge biased on one side; and that the opinion of twelve honest jurymen gives still a better hope of right than cross and pile does. It is left therefore, to the juries, if they think the permanent judges are under any bias whatever in any cause, to take on themselves to judge the law as well as the fact. They never exercise this power but when they suspect partiality in the judges; and by the exercise of this power they have been the firmest bulwarks of English liberty.”
Supreme Court Justice Byron White wrote, “The purpose of a jury is to guard against the exercise of arbitrary power – to make available the commonsense judgment of the community as a hedge against the overzealous or mistaken prosecutor and in preference to the professional or perhaps over conditioned or biased response of a judge.” (Taylor v. Louisiana, 419 U.S. 522, 530 (1975).)
There is no right to a 12 person jury. It needs only be large enough to provide a “cross section” of the public. In Williams v. Florida, 399 U.S. 78 (1970), the Supreme Court ruled that a Florida jury of six was sufficient, and that “the 12-man panel is not a necessary ingredient of ‘trial by jury.’”
California Constitution – Article 1, Section 16
Trial by jury is an inviolate right and shall be secured to all, but in a civil cause three-fourths of the jury may render a verdict. A jury may be waived in a criminal cause by the consent of both parties expressed in open court by the defendant and the defendant’s counsel. In a civil cause a jury may be waived by the consent of the parties expressed as prescribed by statute.
In civil causes the jury shall consist of 12 persons or a lesser number agreed on by the parties in open court. In civil causes other than causes within the appellate jurisdiction of the court of appeal the Legislature may provide that the jury shall consist of eight persons or a lesser number agreed on by the parties in open court.
In criminal actions in which a felony is charged, the jury shall consist of 12 persons. In criminal actions in which a misdemeanor is charged, the jury shall consist of 12 persons or a lesser number agreed on by the parties in open court.
California law says you are qualified to be a juror if you:
- Are a U.S. citizen
- Are at least 18 years old
- Can understand English enough to understand and discuss the case
- Are a resident of the county that sent you the jury summons
- Have not served on a jury in the last 12 months
- Are not currently on a grand jury or on another trial jury
- Are not under a conservatorship
- Have had your civil rights restored if you were convicted of a felony or malfeasance while holding public office
- No one is exempt because of his or her job, race, color, religion, sex, national origin, sexual orientation, or economic status.
James Moore is an experienced trial lawyer representing people in catastrophic injury cases.