Jury Bias in Statutory Rape Case: Violation of Fair Cross-Section and Public Trial Rights?, Exams of Criminal Law

A case where darlene defendant, a woman, was tried for statutory rape and alleges jury selection bias based on gender during the trial. The jury venire had a disproportionate number of women and students, and the prosecutor used peremptory challenges to strike women jurors. The document also raises concerns about the closure of the trial during the minor victim's testimony and its potential impact on the defendant's right to a public trial. The court is asked to rule on these allegations of constitutional violations.

Typology: Exams

2012/2013

Uploaded on 02/13/2013

atasi
atasi 🇮🇳

4.6

(32)

134 documents

1 / 1

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
Exam Number
Criminal Procedure II LS1 Calhoun Final 2011SL.DOCPage 15 of 15
Part III
Essay (40 points)
Darlene Defendant, a woman, was tried for statutory rape upon a minor, a 14 year old boy
who was the son of her next door neighbor. The case was tried in a state that permits jurors to elect
to be automatically excused from jury service if they are the principal care giver of a minor child.
The state provides a similar automatic exemption for jurors who are full-time students pursuing a
college education. Most of those who claimed the exemption for being a parent were women. As a
result, the jury venir of 500 persons had only 175 women (35% of the venire). In addition, only 15
students were in the venire of 500 (3%) despite the fact that this particular community (a college
town) had 10% of its registered voters attending college. Eligible jurors were chosen from the roll
of registered voters.
During jury selection the prosecutor used 4 of his peremptory challenges to strike women
jurors so that the final jury had only one woman juror. When asked to justify his use of
peremptories, the prosecuting attorney said he struck the women jurors because when he asked
them on voir dire if they would be embarrassed to hear graphic details about sexual acts between a
grown woman and a teen-aged boy, they had indicated some concern. The prosecutor did not ask
any of the male jurors whether they would be bothered by such evidence.
During the trial, when the minor victim testified, the prosecutor asked that the proceedings
be closed and that all spectators be removed from the courtroom. The Defendant objected. The
judge ordered the proceedings closed for the direct and cross-examination of the minor.
Defendant was convicted. On appeal, she alleges that the jury selection process violated her
6
th
Amendment right to a fair cross section of the community and also violated the equal protection
clause of the 14
th
Amendment. She also alleges that her 6
th
Amendment right to a public trial was
violated. How should the court rule and why?

Partial preview of the text

Download Jury Bias in Statutory Rape Case: Violation of Fair Cross-Section and Public Trial Rights? and more Exams Criminal Law in PDF only on Docsity!

Exam Number

Criminal Procedure II LS1 Calhoun Final 2011SL.DOCPage 15 of 15

Part III Essay (40 points)

Darlene Defendant, a woman, was tried for statutory rape upon a minor, a 14 year old boy who was the son of her next door neighbor. The case was tried in a state that permits jurors to elect to be automatically excused from jury service if they are the principal care giver of a minor child. The state provides a similar automatic exemption for jurors who are full-time students pursuing a college education. Most of those who claimed the exemption for being a parent were women. As a result, the jury venir of 500 persons had only 175 women (35% of the venire). In addition, only 15 students were in the venire of 500 (3%) despite the fact that this particular community (a college town) had 10% of its registered voters attending college. Eligible jurors were chosen from the roll of registered voters.

During jury selection the prosecutor used 4 of his peremptory challenges to strike women jurors so that the final jury had only one woman juror. When asked to justify his use of peremptories, the prosecuting attorney said he struck the women jurors because when he asked them on voir dire if they would be embarrassed to hear graphic details about sexual acts between a grown woman and a teen-aged boy, they had indicated some concern. The prosecutor did not ask any of the male jurors whether they would be bothered by such evidence.

During the trial, when the minor victim testified, the prosecutor asked that the proceedings be closed and that all spectators be removed from the courtroom. The Defendant objected. The judge ordered the proceedings closed for the direct and cross-examination of the minor.

Defendant was convicted. On appeal, she alleges that the jury selection process violated her 6 th^ Amendment right to a fair cross section of the community and also violated the equal protection clause of the 14th^ Amendment. She also alleges that her 6th^ Amendment right to a public trial was violated. How should the court rule and why?