Jury Selection Assignment

Find a newspaper article from your state which describes the jury selection for a current trial. Describe the crime the defendant is charged with. Were any jurors challenged for cause or preemptory challenges? Describe the types of jurors you think the prosecution would want and the type you think the defense would want.

The case selected is Capitol v. Thomas, where Jammie Thomas-Rasset of Brianerd, Minnesota, was accused of copyright infringement and illegally sharing 24 songs on the file sharing application Kazaa. Originally, the defendant, Thomas-Rasset, was found legally responsible in a 2007 trial for illegally sharing the said 24 songs and was ordered to pay $222,000 in statutory damages. The judge in Thomas-Rasset’s trial, Michael J. Davis, ordered a retrial when he “decided he had erred in giving jury instructions [for 2007 trial]” (Karnowski, 2009).

The Thomas-Rasset’s second trial was held on June 15, 2009. On the same day, the Court went through the procedure of jury selection. As Nate Anderson of Ars Technica put it, the process “appeared to confirm Minnesota's reputation as a place of Lutheran virtue and hard work. Of the 19 people called up for questioning, no one admitted to having used Napster, KaZaA, or a P2P file-sharing program—and this despite the presence of several college students and recent grads.” The final 12 jurors were “five men and seven women, all white, ranging in age from college students to retirees” (Anderson, 2009).

The retrial actually made things worse for Thomas-Rasset. The new jury found that she “willfully violated copyrights, awarding the companies $80,000 per song, or $1.92 million” (Karnowski, 2009).

As clarified in the second paragraph, in the retrial, there were no jurors who challenged for cause or preemptory challenges. This jury selection was exactly what the prosecution wanted as they were law-abiding citizens who seemed to have no sympathy for the defendant. If the defense could have it their way, they would have wanted a jury full of people who were advocates of file sharing and opponents of big record companies.


Anderson, N. (2009). Jury selected in Thomas retrial: shockingly law-abiding. Retrieved November 10, 2009, from http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/06/jury-selected-in-thomas-retrial-shockingly-law-abiding.ars

Capitol v. Thomas. (2009, September 28). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 10:23, November 10, 2009, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Capitol_v._Thomas&oldid=316727088

Karnowski, S. (2009, June 19). Jury awards $1.92m in music-sharing suit. Associated Press, p. 9. Retrieved from http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2009/06/19/jury_awards_192m_in_music_sharing_suit/

Grand Jury V. Preliminary Hearing

In Stearns County, Minnesota, they use the grand jury system (County of Stearns Minnesota, 2004). The differences between grand juries and a preliminary hearing method vary. For example, a grand jury decides if there is a probable cause to accuse individuals or corporations on criminal charges based on the evidence provided (US Courts, 2007). Grand jury sessions are held in a private room, with only the grand jury, which consists on 23 people, government lawyers, court reporters, an interpreter if needed, and the witnesses to be heard, all are under oath (US Courts, 2007). While a preliminary hearing is where the judge decides if there is enough evidence to force the defendant to stand trial (FindLaw, 2009). In reaching this probable cause decision, the judge listens to arguments from the government (through a government attorney, or "prosecutor"), and from the defendant (usually through his or her attorney) (FindLaw, 2009). The prosecutor may call witnesses to testify, and can introduce physical evidence in an effort to convince the judge that the case should go to trial (FindLaw, 2009). The defense usually cross-examines the government's witnesses and calls into question any other evidence presented against the defendant, seeking to convince the judge that the prosecutor's case is not strong enough, so that the case against the defendant must be dismissed before trial (FindLaw, 2009).

Sources:

County of Stearns Minnesota. (2004, October 28). Stearns County Grand Jury Returns 1st Degree Murder Indictment re: Eric Maurice Wright. Retrieved November 5, 2009, from

http://www.co.stearns.mn.us/1271_3561.htm

FindLaw. (2009). Preliminary Hearing. Retrieved November 5, 2009, from http://criminal.findlaw.com/crimes/criminal_stages/criminal_preliminary_hearing/

US Courts. (2007, October). Grand Jury Handbook. Retrieved November 5, 2009, from http://www.uscourts.gov/jury/grandjury.html

The right to a Speedy Trial (Minnesota vs. Nevada)

Minnesota House of Representatives
photo courtesy of Policy and Medicine
http://www.policymed.com/2009/10/state-policy-minnesota-reconsidering-physician-reporting-and-gift-law.html

The right to a speedy trial is a fundamental principle in our criminal justice system. Although each state is independent in its ability to draft statues to address the timelines involved in criminal proceedings there is a similarity throughout the states in this manner. This post will look at both Minnesota and Nevada and their statutes relating to the right to a speedy trial.

Minnesota’s Office of the Reviser of Statutes states the speedy trial statute as such: 90% of all criminal cases must be concluded within 120 days from beginning to end, 97% of all criminal cases must be complete 180 days and 99% of all criminal cases must be complete of within 365 days. Minnesota measures these days from the time of a criminal complaint or indictment until the defendant is sentenced and placed in jail or found not guilty (Minnesota Office of the Reviser of Statutes, 2009).

The speedy trial statute for the state of Nevada allows that the state shall have a trial within 60 days following arraignment. The state does, however, have exceptions. The state may allow for continuances based on a defendant’s request for more time to prepare his or her defense for trial and in such cases when the court is unable to proceed to trial due to time and calendar conflicts. Under certain circumstances, if the case involves a victim under the age of 16, a continuance may not be granted by the state (Nevada Revised Statutes, 2007).

Sources:

Minnesota’s Office of the Reviser of Statutes. (2009). Criminal Trials; Timing Objectives for Case Disposition. Retrieved November 7, 2009, from https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/?view=info

Nevada Revised Statutes. (2007). Right of State to trial within 60 days after arraignment; exceptions. Retrieved November 7, 2009, from http://search.leg.state.nv.us/

Deliberations Begin in Burnsville Murder Trial

After 8 days of hearing testimony from both the defense and prosecutors deliberations by the jury have begun in the Tina San Roman murder trial. 19-year-old Taylor Pass is being charged with second degree murder as well as attempting to kill 24-year old Odai Al-Refo, roommate of San Roman who was 35 (Powell, 2009).

According to authorities, Pass stabbed San Roman in the garage, who then called for help. Al-Refo came to her aid and was also hurt in the altercation. The 911 recordings indicate the nature of the crime as San Roman is heard saying "Help me, I'm dying." after receiving a 4-inch stab wound to the chest (Powell, 2009).

The defense argued that Pass was not the murderer but rather Al-Refo was the one responsible, and to cover up his actions, proceeded to stab himself. Prosecution lawyer Lawrence Clark argued "She's not asking for help from somebody who has stabbed her, she's asking for help from somebody in a similar situation" (Powell, 2009). The tapes also confirmed this as San Roman is heard crying out to Al-Refo.

The defense also claimed that police wrongfully accused Pass, since once arriving on the scene they immediately arrested him and named him the culprit before examining the DNA as well as the crime scene. The defense stated that "police probed the wrong man and didn't collect evidence, didn't get it all tested properly, and didn't share all of the lab results they did get with prosecutors or the defense until the trial was more than half over" (Powell, 2009).

San Roman was found inside the home on the staircase, and it is believed she was trying to reach her 9-year-old son, Brendon Kulyas. San Roman would die from her wounds a week later in the hospital, while Al-Refo would make a full recovery and move to North Carolina. Kulyas was unharmed that night.

The defense also pointed to a grey hoodie that was found bloodstained in the garage claiming "there were unknown wearers DNA found on the grey hoodie, along with a cap in the garage. That cap was black with orange flames on the sides and on the bill, and it had the word Sniper in large white lettering on the front. Those items had both the blood of San Roman and Al-Refo on them, but also touch DNA from two or three more wearers" (Powell, 2009).

According to video surveillance taken from Shooters Billiards on Hwy. 13, Pass can be seen wearing both the hoodie and hat in question, thus negating the claims by the defense. The prosecution called for "jurors to consider what the defense claimed that Al-Refo had concocted this story, and that he cut himself was ridiculous.
As invoking a phantom suspect and urged the jury to not speculate nor go on a wild expedition" (Powell, 2009).


Taylor Pass
Photo credit: Dakota County Sheriff

Powell, J. (2009, November 4). Jury Deliberates in Burnsville Murder Trial. Minnesota StarTribune. Retrieved November 8, 2009, from http://www.startribune.com/local/south/69127562.html?page=1&c=y

Selecting Judges in Minnesota

- The state of Minnesota selects its state supreme court judges by means of non partisan general elections. Partisanship and political parties play a huge role in the nomination of these candidates ("Justice at Stake," 2001).

- The state of Minnesota selects its intermediate appellate court judges by means of non partisan elections, opposite to that of supreme court judges ("Justice at Stake," 2001).

- The state of Minnesota selects trial court judges by means of non partisan elections for all general jurisdiction judges ("Justice at Stake," 2001).

Popular elections have their differences. On the other hand federal judges at the national level are appointed by the president and approved by the United States Senate. Federal judges do not have a fixed term and are appointed for life. Having popular elections at the state and local levels has its own benefits. Popular election in a way sort of strengthens the judiciary. Judges that are forced to run for office and seek reelection would consistently seek to please public opinion and stay close to we the people, which is indeed what local and state justice's are supposed to do. The founding fathers of this nation wanted the judicial branch to completely steer clear of political partisanship, to be free of the chains of partisanship, and free to be able to interpret the law fairly without any bias judgment. Partisanship creates bias judgment (Hall, 1999).

Sources:

Hall, K. 1999. The Judiciary on Trial: State Constitutional Reform and the rise of an Elected Judiciary. The historian 46. Retrieved from http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/justice/howdid/kermit.html

Justice at Stake Campaign, National Surveys of American Voters and State Judges,. October 2001 – January 2002. [PDF document]. Available at www.justiceatstake.org

What Court Would Hear This Case?

Taking place in 2007 Everson appealed ruling, requesting that his conviction be reversed and a new trial conducted based on the grounds of the process of jury deliberations. The Minnesota Supreme Court would have heard the case, however, Everson’s request to a new trial was denied.

Chaska, Minnesota (2008, May 29). Website of Chaska Herald Newspaper. Retrieved online from: http://www.chaskaherald.com/news/breaking-news-alert/minnesota-supreme-court-denies-everson-appeal-4466


Minneapolis police arrest Dwayne Murray, 46, of robbery for grabbing money from a cash register at the Candy Jar. He was then charged later with two other robberies in South Minneapolis for robbing a jewelry store and a florist shop. The court of general jurisdiction would hear this case.

Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota newspaper (2009, Oct.23). Website of Star Tribune newspaper. Retrieved online from: http://www.startribune.com/local/65879807.html?elr=KArksUUUoDEy3LGDiO7aiU

Minnesota's Court System

According to the website for the “National Center for State Courts”, As of 2007, Minnesota’s court system is broken up into three different court sections.
Minnesota has one trial court, and two appellate courts. The first of the two Appellate Courts, the Supreme Court is labeled as a court of last resort of which seven justices sit en banc. The Supreme Court mainly handles mandatory jurisdiction in criminal, administrative agency, and federal cases. The second appellate is the court of appeals of which sixteen judges sit both en banc and in panels. The court is referenced as an intermediate appellate court, or IAC. The IAC deals with Civil, Criminal, Administrative Agency, and Juvenile cases.
Lastly, the District Court is named a Limited Jurisdiction Court. The District Court serves ten districts of which 276 judges sit in jury trials, with the exception of small claims and non-extended juvenile cases. Cases mainly seen in the District court are those of tort, real property, mental health, domestic relations, criminal, traffic, small claims and miscellaneous violations. (“National Center for State Courts”)

There is extensive information about all three courts including, justices, judges, jurisdictions, arguments, rulings, and publications at the following links:

Supreme Court of Minnesota: http://www.mncourts.gov/?page=550

District Court of Minnesota: http://www.mncourts.gov/?page=238

Court of Appeals of Minnesota: http://www.mncourts.gov/?page=551

Cite: "Court Statistics Project." National Center for State Courts. 10 26 2009. The National Center for State Courts, Web. 26 Oct 2009. .