What to Expect During Jury Selection in a New Jersey Criminal Trial

What to Expect During Jury Selection in a New Jersey Criminal Trial

Jury selection can be one of the most critical parts of a criminal trial in New Jersey. The jurors who are selected will decide the fate of the defendant, so both the prosecution and defense want to ensure they have a jury that will view their case favorably. The process of choosing jurors in New Jersey has undergone some significant changes in recent years in an effort to make jury pools more diverse and representative of the community. This article will walk through what you can expect as an attorney or defendant during jury selection in a New Jersey criminal courtroom.

Recent Changes to Increase Fairness

Concerns over the misuse of peremptory challenges to intentionally exclude jurors based on race or gender led to some pivotal reforms in New Jersey’s jury selection process starting in 2022[5]. The state Supreme Court ruled that attorneys must now provide a reason if asked why they chose to excuse a potential juror. The goal is to prevent the discriminatory use of peremptories. Judges can override a peremptory challenge if they believe the reasoning was merely pretext for discrimination.

Additionally, New Jersey court officials have started collecting demographic data – including race, ethnicity, age, and gender – on jury pools and seated jurors in an effort to ensure representation of diverse community groups. This information was not previously tracked but will help assess if certain populations are being excluded from juries. Bringing implicit biases to light is the first step in countering them.

What Happens During Voir Dire Questioning

Voir dire allows attorneys to assess jurors’ backgrounds, beliefs, and ability to judge the particular case at hand without bias. Judges typically start by asking basic yes or no questions of the whole jury pool, also known as the jury venire, to weed out those who clearly cannot serve. This may include people who personally know key trial participants, have language barriers, medical issues, or unavoidable scheduling conflicts.

Attorneys then have a chance to address the potential jurors to identify any biases, prejudices, or life experiences that could prevent them from making an impartial decision if selected. There are no strict rules governing the types of questions lawyers can ask, although they must be relevant to uncovering bias. Judges can limit or disallow inappropriate or irrelevant questions. Questions often focus on jurors’ familiarity with the case details, connections to law enforcement, prior jury service, opinions about the charged crime, and views on the justice system overall.

It’s important to note that jurors can only be excused for cause if they clearly state they cannot judge the case fairly and impartially. An attorney cannot have someone dismissed just because a juror’s background or beliefs do not align with the case they plan to present. There must be clear evidence they cannot set those aside.

Peremptory Challenges Allow Dismissal Without Cause

In addition to removals for cause, both prosecutors and defense attorneys can request a defined number of jurors be excused without having to provide an explanation. As mentioned, new rules require judges to ask for a reason if they believe peremptory challenges are being used in a discriminatory way. However, some critics argue there is still potential for misuse.

Peremptories exist to allow legal teams to excuse potential jurors they simply feel, based on experience or intuition, will not view their case favorably. This gives attorneys a bit more control over the makeup of the final jury. However, research shows peremptory use may backfire. Attorneys often cannot accurately predict which jurors will side with them, so removing ones they assume unfavorable may have the opposite effect.

There are also concerns that allowing a defined number of unexplained dismissals undermines efforts to seat representative juries. So while peremptories remain part of the process for now, their use faces increasing scrutiny.

Final Jury Chosen and Sworn In

Questioning continues, with attorneys taking turns removing jurors for cause or exercising their allotted peremptories, until the number of jurors matches the amount required for the trial. Twelve jurors are seated for standard criminal cases. If the trial is expected to be lengthy, some judges will add one or two alternate jurors who step in if someone on the main panel needs to withdraw during the trial.

Once the final group of jurors is chosen, they stand and take an oath swearing to judge the case fairly and deliver a verdict based solely on the evidence. The same jurors must serve for both the guilt and penalty phases in cases that can result in lengthy prison terms.

Conclusion: Critical to Get Representative Jury

Jury selection lays the foundation for a fair criminal trial. Recent changes limiting peremptory use and collecting juror demographics aim to address chronic underrepresentation of diverse community groups. However, defense teams should still closely assess if the seated jury represents a cross-section of the public. An unrepresentative jury could provide grounds for appeal if a guilty verdict is delivered. Paying attention to this critical first phase remains essential to protect a defendant’s right to a fair trial.

I hope this overview gives both prosecutors and defense attorneys a good understanding of what to expect during jury selection in New Jersey criminal courts. Voir dire sets the tone for the trial, so all parties should be prepared to question potential jurors carefully to avoid bias and empanel a representative, impartial jury. Let me know if you have any other questions!