0
What is the reason that a lawyer must give for a peremptory challenge of a prospective juror?
A third type of challenge is called peremptory. This challenge removes potential jurors without the necessity for providing a reason. These types of challenges are limited to a predetermined set of numbers. In 1986, in Batson vs. Kentucky, the Supreme Court decided that peremptory challenges could not be used to discriminate solely based on race. The rule established was that it must be shown that the defendant is a member of a recognized racial group that has been intentionally excluded from the jury and the need to raise a reasonable suspicion that the opposing side used peremptory challenges in a manner that was discriminatory.
What else can I help you with?
Can you have a sentence with peremptory please?
Peremptory means insisting on immediate action. He spoke in a peremptory way. Her peremptory behavior is offensive.
What is difference between peremptory challenge and removal for cause?
A peremptory challenge allows an attorney to remove a potential juror without providing a reason, while a removal for cause requires showing that a juror is unfit to serve based on a specific reason. Peremptory challenges are limited in number, while removals for cause can be requested without limit for valid reasons.
Removing an unwanted potential juror without the need to disclose a reason for the removal is accomplished by the means of a?
peremptory challenge
Which type of challenge is one used to exclude potential jurors from serving on the jury without any supporting reason or cause being provided by the attorney?
Peremptory challenge.
What would be an attorney's motivation for using a peremptory challenge during the voir dire?
Because, for whatever reason, they do not want that person on the jury.
When can a defense attorney use a challenge to remove an individual from a jury without disclosing his or her reason for not wanting the individual on the jury?
A defense attorney can use a peremptory challenge to remove an individual from a jury without disclosing the reason during the jury selection process. Each side typically has a limited number of peremptory challenges, allowing them to exclude jurors without cause. However, this must be done within the constraints of the law, as peremptory challenges cannot be used to discriminate based on race, gender, or other protected characteristics. If the opposing party suspects discrimination, they can raise a Batson challenge, requiring the attorney to provide a race-neutral explanation for the removal.
In Missouri can women be excused from jury duty based on their sex?
Absolutely not. HOWEVER - when selecting a jury panel - during Voire Dire, the attorneys questioning the prospective jurors MAY, for their own reasons, exercise a peremptory challenge against certain jurors they feel may be hostile to their case. They do NOT have to explain their reason why, but the sex of the juror could be a factor in a particular case.
What do you think is the strongest argument in favor of eliminating the peremptory challenge In favor of retaining it?
The strongest argument in favor of eliminating the peremptory challenge is that it can perpetuate systemic biases and discrimination, as it allows attorneys to exclude jurors without needing to provide a reason, often leading to racially or socially motivated exclusions. In contrast, the strongest argument for retaining it is that peremptory challenges provide attorneys with a tool to shape a jury that they believe will be more favorable to their case, thus preserving a degree of strategic discretion in the trial process. Balancing fairness and strategic interests is key in this debate.
When an attorney asks the court to dismiss a juror without reason?
This is a "peremptory challenge." Court rules usually give each attorney a limited number of peremptory challenges. The other type of challenge is a challenge for cause, meaning there is some good cause for dismissing the juror. Cause can mean being related to or knowing one of the parties, being opposed to the death penalty in capital cases or anything that will prevent a juror from freely and fairly rendering a just verdict in the case at hand. Court rules give an unlimited number of challenges for cause.
What is challenge for cause?
A challenge for cause is a legal procedure used during jury selection to disqualify a potential juror based on specific biases or inability to serve impartially. Unlike a peremptory challenge, which allows a party to dismiss a juror without stating a reason, a challenge for cause requires the party to provide a valid justification, such as a conflict of interest or a preconceived opinion about the case. The judge ultimately decides whether to grant the challenge. This process ensures that the jury remains fair and unbiased.
When a defense attorney thinks that the jury pool is biased in some significant way he or she will make a challenge of?
When a defense attorney believes the jury pool is biased, they will typically make a challenge for cause. This challenge requests that the court dismiss a potential juror based on specific biases or prejudices that may affect their impartiality. If the judge agrees, that juror is removed from the pool. The attorney may also use peremptory challenges to exclude jurors without stating a reason, but these are limited in number.
What are the two types of challenges in the jury selection process?
The two types of challenges in the jury selection process are challenges for cause and peremptory challenges. Challenges for cause are based on specific reasons why a juror may be biased or unable to be impartial. Peremptory challenges allow attorneys to dismiss a certain number of potential jurors without stating a reason.
