Abstract

The National Center for State Courts examined dead-locked, or “hung,” juries to see what characteristics they share and how they might be avoided. As one part of the study, surveys of jurors, judges, and attorneys were conducted in four jurisdictions. The Central Division, Criminal, of the Los Angeles County (California) Superior Court and the Superior Court of the District of Columbia were selected because of reported concerns about hung jury rates in those jurisdictions. The Maricopa County (Arizona) Superior Court was chosen because of an innovative procedure there that permits judges to allow further evidence and arguments when a jury reports it is deadlocked. The Bronx County (New York) Supreme Court was included because, like the other sites, it had a high volume of felony jury trials (allowing for quick collection of data) and had court personnel willing to cooperate in the study. A total of 382 cases were included in the analysis. A second part of the study took a closer look at 46 of the cases, trying to determine the primary and peripheral causes of deadlock. This subgroup, while too small to provide statistically significant numbers, nonetheless offers some interesting insight into the factors leading to a hung jury.

This abstract has been taken from the authors' introduction.

Document Type

Article

Publication Date

2004

Publication Information

251 National Institute of Justice Journal 25-27 (2004)

Download

Included in

Courts Commons

Share

COinS