By LARRY NEUMEISTER
Associated Press Writer
NEW YORK (AP) -- Jurors cannot ignore the law or evidence in a case even if they believe the charges conflict with their personal beliefs about race, ethnicity or anything else, a federal appeals court has ruled.
The ruling of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday denounced what is known as "jury nullification", a legal theory claiming jurors can vote to acquit a defendant on social grounds even if they believe the person guilty.
Critics of the theory claim it was used in the O.J. Simpson criminal trial, when lawyer Johnnie Cochran encouraged jurors to acquit Simpson as a way of sending a message to racist police.
"We categorically reject the idea that in a society committed to the rule of law, jury nullification is desirable, or that courts may permit it to occur when it is within their power to prevent,'' Judge Jose A. Cabranes wrote for the unanimous three-judge panel.
The ruling came in an Albany case where jurors complained to a judge that the only black member of the jury appeared opposed to drug laws.
A trial judge determined the juror believed the defendant had a right to deal drugs because the defendant was disadvantaged, and that the juror would not vote to convict "no matter what the evidence was.''
As a result, the judge dismissed the juror and the other 11 members voted to convict.
While the appeals court upheld the judge's right to dismiss jurors who ignore the evidence and law, it set a high standard for doing so.
Cabranes wrote that a judge must make sure a juror is truly attempting to nullify a case and not merely unpersuaded by the evidence. In the Albany case, the juror insisted he was being objective and merely felt prosecutors had not proven their case.
The trial judge apparently was unconvinced, but that was not reason enough to throw the juror off the panel, the appeals court ruled. Consequently, the conviction had to be overturned, Cabranes said.
The court noted that "nullification''
has occurred in American history, such as prior to the Civil War when juries
in the North refused to convict slaves on escape charges that may have
forced their
return to their owners.
The court also recalled "shameful'' examples of jury nullification, such as the refusal of juries in the South to convict white defendants in the lynchings of blacks.
In either case, it is not permissible, the court said.
"Authorizing dismissal of a juror who disregards the law does not include an exception for jurors who violate their sworn duty on the basis of racial or ethnic interests or affinities,'' the ruling said.
Browse more of the JRP site
You Can Help!
Contact Us:
Jury Rights Project