 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Schwab7/16/2003
-09.1-12(2)." State v. Torgerson, 2000 ND 105, 16, 611 N.W.2d 182.
[ ] We conclude Schwab's bare assertions of systematic exclusion of distinct groups are insufficient to show under-representation of any distinct groups and systematic exclusion of potential jurors.
[ ] The trial court's decision to grant Schwab's improper motion created an unanticipated shortage of petit jurors. Rules have been adopted concerning selection of jurors.
[ ] N.D. Sup. Ct. Admin. Order 9 provides, in part:
1. All courts conducting jury trials shall use jurors selected only pursuant to the Uniform Jury Selection and Service Act (N.D.C.C. ch. 27-09.1) and this Administrative Rule.
2. All courts conducting jury trials shall obtain jury panels in the manner prescribed by the jury selection plan filed with the Clerk of the North Dakota Supreme Court.
The jury selection plan filed with the clerk of this Court provides, in part:
All disqualifications and excuses, temporary or permanent, must be granted by the court. The judge of the court may delegate these duties or issue a policy covering normal circumstances, by attaching an order to that effect to this plan. The clerk will note the disqualifications and excuses on the master jury list so that the status of prospective jurors is current at all times.
The judge of the court may delegate routine decisions relating to qualifications and excuses to the clerk of court, court administrator, or other qualified person. The extent of the delegation and guidelines to be followed shall be in writing and attached to the selection plan.
By order of April 17, 2002, the presiding judge of the South Central Judicial District "delegate routine decisions relating to qualifications and temporary excuses for jurors to Kim Wilkens, Clerk of District Court, Oliver County, North Dakota."
[ ] Legislation has been enacted to deal with a shortage of jurors.
[ ] Section 27-09.1-09(2), N.D.C.C., provides:
If there is an unanticipated shortage of available petit jurors, the court may require the sheriff to summon a sufficient number of petit jurors selected at random by the clerk in a manner prescribed by the court.
See also N.D.C.C. § 29-17-13, which provides, in part:
If a sufficient number of jurors cannot be obtained from the box to form a trial jury, the court, as often as is necessary, may order the sheriff to summon from the body of the county as many persons qualified to serve as jurors as the court deems sufficient to form a jury.
[ ] Because the prescribed procedures do not specifically govern the shortage of jurors at the time of trial, when the shortage developed, the trial court should have prescribed a selection procedure for the clerk of court to follow in summoning additional jurors. However, we agree with the trial court's determinations that the additional jurors were "from the panel," the clerk "was doing what she could to get people here that could be available for voir dire" without delaying the trial, and that the clerk's screening process was nothing more "than trying to make sure that we've got enough people to pick a jury today." Schwab has shown no prejudice from the process employed by the trial court and the clerk of court to remedy the shortage of jurors caused by granting Schwab's motion.
[ ] The judgment is affirmed.
[ ] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J., Dale V. Sandstrom, William A. Neumann, Mary Muehlen Maring, Carol Ronning Kapsner.
|