 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Commonwealth v. Parson6/17/2004
efendant, witness, or complainant in a criminal case . The very language of Part II, Section 7(7) clarifies that a criminal defendant does not have an absolute right to inspect the completed forms.
Thrice, this Court has approved a local rule of the Jefferson Circuit Court that denies a criminal defendant access to the addresses of the jurors who serve on that defendant's case. Thompkins v. Commonwealth , Ky., 54 S .W .3d 147,151 (2001); Cornelison v. Commonwealth , Ky., 990 S .W.2d 609, 610 (1999); Samples v. Commonwealth , Ky., 983 S.W .2d 151, 152-53 (1998), overruled on other grounds by Lawson v. Commonwealth , Ky., 53 S.W .3d 534, 544 (2001). Accordingly, instead of copying the larger original forms with the addresses blacked out, the jury pool administrators create a smaller, typewritten (thus fully legible) form containing all of the data provided by the juror except the juror's address and the juror's answers to the questions regarding legal qualifications .
Prior to voir dire, defense counsel demanded to see the original qualification forms submitted by the jurors selected for the panel in this case, suggesting that the jury pool administrators may have inaccurately transferred information from the original form to the typewritten form . Instead, the jury pool administrators furnished the forms for all of the 248 jurors who had been impaneled for that month - except one, Juror No. 24366, whose original form apparently had been lost or misplaced . Voir dire lasted approximately two hours and Appellant does not claim that defense counsel's voir dire was restricted in any fashion. After forty-eight minutes of deliberating over peremptory strikes, and after some prompting by the trial judge, defense counsel submitted his peremptory strike list, complaining that he had not had enough time to examine all 248 juror qualification forms . Examination of the peremptory strike sheets revealed that the prosecutor and defense counsel had both struck the same three jurors .
A jury of twelve, plus two alternate jurors, was sworn and seated and the remainder of the jurors were excused . Four witnesses then testified before court adjourned for the day. On the following morning, defense counsel demanded a mistrial claiming that he had now had a full opportunity to examine all 248 juror qualification forms and that he would have struck four different jurors than he actually struck had he not been forced to prematurely complete the exercise of his peremptory strikes . The jurors he claims he would have struck were Juror No. 24366, whose original form was missing; Juror No. 28117, who failed to sign his form and who, therefore, was deemed irresponsible ; Juror No. 491, who worked a night shift (information not transferred to the typewritten form) ; and Juror No. 23788, who wrote "invasion of privacy" in the margin next to the inquiries about his marital status and occupation (though he did furnish the requested information) .
It is voir dire that is the " sine qua non to the seating of a fair and impartial jury." McCarthy v. Commonwealth, Ky., 867 S .W.2d 469, 471 (1993), overruled on other grounds by Lawson v. Commonwealth , supra, at 544. To the extent that juror qualification forms contain information related to subjects other than a juror's legal qualifications, its purpose is to expedite the voir dire process by eliminating questions routinely asked of every juror.
Juror No . 24366, whose original form was missing, had obviously submitted a form because the data she presumably provided had been transferred from the original form to the typewritten form. Appellant could have made a record on the accuracy question by asking that she be questioned in chambers as to w
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Kentucky DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|