NCJ Number
9777
Date Published
1971
Length
80 pages
Annotation
STATE, FEDERAL AND NEW YORK METHODS OF VOIR DIRE EXAMINATIONS ARE COMPARED TO FIND THAT METHOD WHICH BEST SECURES AN IMPARTIAL JURY IN AN EXPEDITIOUS MANNER.
Abstract
IN TERMS OF SAVING TIME IT WAS FOUND THAT THE NEW YORK METHOD IS FIRST, THE FEDERAL SECOND, AND THE STATE THIRD. ONLY THE JUDGE'S TIME IS SAVED IN NEW YORK HOWEVER, AND THERE IS A POSSIBILITY OF GREAT IMPOSITION ON THE TIME OF JURORS AND COUNSEL. THE AUTHORS ALSO ARGUE THAT A FAIR AND IMPARTIAL JURY IS A BASIC REQUIREMENT AND THAT THE NEW YORK METHOD OF VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION PRESENT AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ABUSE SINCE THE QUESTIONING CAN TAKE PLACE OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE JUDGE. IT IS SUGGESTED IN THIS ARTICLE THAT THE FEDERAL METHOD OF JUROR QUESTIONING ALLOWS SAVINGS OF BOTH JUDGE AND JUROR TIME AND PRESENTS LITTLE OPPORTUNITY FOR ABUSE, SINCE ALL QUESTIONS ARE SCREENED AND POSED BY THE JUDGE. THE AUTHORS URGE THE ADOPTION OF THE FEDERAL METHOD OF VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION FOR ALL COURTS. THE APPENDICES INCLUDE A STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF TIME SAVING UNDER THE VARIOUS METHODS, AND 'SCRIPTS' TO BE USED FOR QUESTIONING JURORS AT JURY IMPANELMENT IN CIVIL AND CRIMINAL COURTS AT THE STATE AND FEDERAL LEVELS.