The Supreme Court has authorized the use of a revised preliminary jury instruction to be given by the Court to the jury before the start of voir dire. The revised instruction (FSJI 1.0) is much more verbose and will be less helpful in selecting a jury than the earlier version. It repeatedly uses the hackneyed phrase “fair and impartial” and eliminates the prior and better language of the earlier version requesting jurors to inform the Court and counsel of their “personal opinions” and “strong feelings.”
Continue Reading November 29th, 2006
At the conclusion of Voir Dire, the Defendant wanted to strike four jurors for cause. The judge denied all the challenges. At least one of the jurors was questionable. On appeal, a new trial was ordered by the 4th DCA because “seating a single juror whose impartiality may reasonably be questioned is a structural error not subject to harmless error analysis.”
In Dorsett v. State, __ So2d __ (4 DCA 2006). the Court noted that the prospective juror had stated she thought the defendant should have to prove his innocence. There was nothing in the record to indicate she ever receded from that preconception. Thus, there was a doubt about her impartiality. “A juror is not impartial when she has difficultly accepting and employing the presumption of innocence.” It was error for the trial court to deny the challenge for cause, and a new trial was ordered.
November 22nd, 2006
RSS
Feed