NCJ Number
79800
Journal
Judicature Volume: 65 Issue: 3 Dated: (September 1981) Pages: 126-135
Date Published
1981
Length
10 pages
Annotation
This article examines selection procedures for petit juries in Oakland County, Mich., and concludes that diligence in tracking down prospective jurors yields panels that are representative of the whole community.
Abstract
A definitive review of the U.S. jury system has argued that the following groups have not served on juries in proportion to their numbers in the population: blue collar workers, nonwhites, the young, the old, and women. With the cooperation of Oakland County's Sixth Circuit Court in late 1978, this study charted the changing demographic and socioeconomic characteristics in a sample of potential jurors from the master list to courtroom panels. Using instructions from Michigan statutes, two random samples were drawn from the registered voters' list, and personal history questionnaires mailed to these persons to determine who is qualified to serve and who is ineligible. While many jurisdictions fail to follow up juror questionnaires, the Oakland County courts show a high degree of vigilance at this critical stage by sending a second notice through the regular mail and a third by certified mail. The remaining nonresponders receive a judge's order delivered by the sheriff, and the final option is a bench warrant for the person's arrest. These efforts bring the response rate to 99.5 percent. The resulting list is screened for statutory exemptions and the remaining persons summoned for service. Requests for postponements must be approved by the presiding judge. In assembling potential jurors, the court officials again resort to repeated and persistent communications. Because the 1970 census data did not reflect recent population changes, this study used the master list as basis for judging alterations in the jury during the selection process. The data gathered showed that as prospective jurors moved through these stages, the group as a whole retained most of the characteristics of the original sample of voters. Minor changes included a slight drop in the percentage of men after the statutory exclusions for employment, a slight decline in the poorer potential jurors, and a decrease in the over 70 age group. Race was not studied because the master list does not denote race and blacks constitute no more than 3 percent of the country's population. The Oakland process produces representative juries, largely because of the administrative practices of the jury clerk in following up potential jurors, granting few exemptions, and allowing only one postponement in most cases. A brief history of the representative jury concept, tables and 23 footnotes are included.