Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Strike for cause (also referred to as challenge for cause or removal for cause) is a method of eliminating potential members from a jury panel in the United States.. During the jury selection process, after voir dire, opposing attorneys may request removal of any juror who does not appear capable of rendering a fair and impartial verdict, in either determining guilt or innocence and/or a ...
A defendant facing the death penalty may challenge for cause a prospective juror who would automatically vote to impose the death penalty in every case Georgia v. McCollum: 505 U.S. 42 (1992) standard on peremptory challenges from Batson v. Kentucky applied to criminal defendant Gade v. National Solid Wastes Management Association: 505 U.S. 88 ...
In law, the right of peremptory challenge is a right in jury selection for the attorneys to reject a certain number of potential jurors without stating a reason. Other potential jurors may be challenged for cause, i.e. by giving a good reason why they might be unable to reach a fair verdict, but the challenge will be considered by the presiding judge and may be denied.
The second option is a peremptory challenge, where an attorney can exclude a juror without stating any reason. While challenges for cause are unlimited, attorneys have a limited number of peremptory challenges, sometimes as few as four, although 10 is more common in non-capital felony cases. [4]
The push by some Republicans to challenge the election results could cause long-term consequences. WSJ’s Jerry Seib explains. Photo illustration: Laura Kammermann
The U.S. Supreme Court has issued numerous rulings on the use of capital punishment (the death penalty). While some rulings applied very narrowly, perhaps to only one individual, other cases have had great influence over wide areas of procedure, eligible crimes, acceptable evidence and method of execution.
At voir dire, each side may question potential jurors to determine any bias, and challenge them if the same is found; the court determines the validity of these challenges for cause. Defendants may not challenge a conviction because a challenge for cause was denied incorrectly if they had the opportunity to use peremptory challenges.
One of the most beneficial fads: wristbands for a cause. It's hard to say if any of the fads of the past decade will be as memorable as, say, the Hula Hoop or Frisbee.