and Other Candid Conversations in Voir Dire

Any time the defense team presents evidence of a client’s mental illness, it does so to explain why the client did something unthinkable. Attorney and trial consultant Denise de La Rue discusses how defense lawyers can find jurors who are willing to listen and will not say “bullsh*t” when counsel uses the terms “mental illness” and “developmental disability.” She provides a juror questionnaire for cases involving mental health issues.

Presented by Eric Davis, Chief of the Felony Trial Division, Harris County Public Defender (Houston, TX)

Race Matters II: The Impact of Race on Criminal Justice
January 10-11, 2019 | Los Angeles, CA

Letter to the Judicial Conference Standing Committee on Rules of Practice & Procedure regarding proposed rule changes to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.

Voir Dire: Part II presented by Kyana Givens, Assistant Federal Defender, Federal Public Defender Western District of Washington (Seattle)

Race Matters I: The Impact of Race on Criminal Justice
September 14-15, 2017 | Detroit, MI

Voir Dire: Part I presented by Martín Sabelli, attorney, San Francisco, CA

Race Matters I: The Impact of Race on Criminal Justice
September 14-15, 2017 | Detroit, MI

Voir Dire of Jury Panel in Arson Case.

A set of questions asked to the jury during the selection process, covering seven topics, including attitudes about sex and consent. 

A voir dire request outline with intentional blanks for the user to fill out by the Bidwill Law Firm. 

An unfilled jury selection form template.

Amicus curiae brief of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and the Colorado Criminal Defense Bar in support of the petition for writ of certiorari.

Argument: A state jury convicted the petitioner, a Muslim, of a number of charges arising out of alleged abuse of his live-in female housekeeper. Before the jury was sworn, a juror informed the court that he held certain views about Islam that might impair his ability to be fair and impartial. The trial court refused to excuse the juror or allow additional questioning related to his expressed bias. Brief argues that Colorado’s “clear” or “unequivocal” expression of bias standard flouts U.S. Supreme Court precedents and its refusal to acknowledge the “significant likelihood” of bias test or to allow criminal defendants to probe potential invidious prejudices makes the state an outlier.

Amicus curiae brief of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers in support of petitioner and urging reversal.

Argument: The theft-of-honest-services statute¸18 U.S.C. §1346, is void for vagueness; also, the presumption of prejudice that arises from intense community hostility and pervasive adverse publicity cannot be rebutted through voir dire.

Often, the process of jury selection is akin to making sausage — the process is ugly but the finished product is a thing of beauty. Witness a recent aggravated assault with a deadly weapon prosecution: An argument in a bar escalated into a serious confrontation involving deadly weapons outside. A jury was left to sort out criminal culpability or lack thereof.

Brief of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers as Amicus Curiae in Support of Petitioner (cert. stage).

Argument: The Court should grant the writ to protect the Sixth Amendment right to an unbiased jury. The critical question is whether a trial court must, at a minimum, ask potential jurors who admit exposure to highly prejudiced pretrial publicity if they have formed opinions about guilt and allow further questioning to uncover bias. The Alabama Supreme Court said no, holding that courts may rely on those jurors' collective, untested assurance that they can be fair. That ruling conflicts with decisions of this Court and must be corrected.