Full access allows:
- Solve all tests online without limits;
- Remove all advertisements on website;
- Adding questions to favorite list;
- Save learning progress;
- Save results of practice exams;
- Watching all wrong answered questions.
84. How should the federal court of appeals decide the issue?
The defendant was convicted. On appeal, he argues that the conviction should be reversed because the court erroneously failed to remove the prospective juror for cause.
During jury selection in federal court, a prospective juror stated that her father and brother were federal agents and that she had met the agent who had arrested the defendant on a number of prior occasions because he played on her brother's softball team. When asked by the court whether she could judge the facts without being biased by knowing the arresting agent, the prospective juror expressed some doubt. The court nonetheless denied the defendant's request to dismiss the prospective juror. The defendant later exercised one of his peremptory challenges to remove the prospective juror from the jury.
Comments (0)
There are no comments at the moment. If you found an error or think question is incorrect, tell everyone about it
Only signed in users can write comments
Signin
A is incorrect. The right to an impartial jury is not violated if the prospective juror does not serve. In this case, because the juror did not ultimately serve on the jury, no such right was violated.
B is incorrect. In Martinez-Salazar, the Court specifically rejected the suggestion that a defendant is prejudiced by having to use a peremptory challenge to cure an erroneous denial of a challenge for cause. United States v. Martinez-Salazar, 528 U.S. 304 (2000).
C is incorrect. The trial court should have removed the prospective juror for cause and, in refusing to do so, did abuse its discretion. However, because the defendant was able to use a peremptory challenge to excuse the prospective juror, the appellate court may uphold the conviction despite the court's abuse of discretion.