http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2008/06/blind-strikes-and-double-strikes.html the tao of criminal defense trial lawyering Fri, 19 Mar 2010 16:39:23 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2008/06/blind-strikes-and-double-strikes.html/comment-page-1#comment-3801 Mark Bennett Thu, 26 Jun 2008 19:17:15 +0000 http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2008/06/blind-strikes-and-double-strikes.html#comment-3801 They do. They do.

]]> http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2008/06/blind-strikes-and-double-strikes.html/comment-page-1#comment-3798 Rob Deters Thu, 26 Jun 2008 17:50:10 +0000 http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2008/06/blind-strikes-and-double-strikes.html#comment-3798 That system sounds terrible. Here in Chicago it's all alternating strikes, with the gov going first, then the defense. Judges have full discretion in how big the panels are (most judges interview panels of four at a time) with a total jury pool of around 60. I find it REALLY easy to predict government strikes. Do prosecutors in Texas get criminal backgrounds on the jurors? That system sounds terrible. Here in Chicago it’s all alternating strikes, with the gov going first, then the defense. Judges have full discretion in how big the panels are (most judges interview panels of four at a time) with a total jury pool of around 60. I find it REALLY easy to predict government strikes. Do prosecutors in Texas get criminal backgrounds on the jurors?

]]> http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2008/06/blind-strikes-and-double-strikes.html/comment-page-1#comment-3721 Mark Bennett Sat, 21 Jun 2008 16:33:16 +0000 http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2008/06/blind-strikes-and-double-strikes.html#comment-3721 Really? I don't keep stats, but I think that "there will ordinarily be no double strikes" is a fair statement. Like I say, the government is more conservative about allowing kooks and lawyers on the jury than the defense. (Could I have phrased that better? I mean that the government is less likely to do it than the defense is.) Really? I don’t keep stats, but I think that “there will ordinarily be no double strikes” is a fair statement. Like I say, the government is more conservative about allowing kooks and lawyers on the jury than the defense. (Could I have phrased that better? I mean that the government is less likely to do it than the defense is.)

]]> http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2008/06/blind-strikes-and-double-strikes.html/comment-page-1#comment-3720 AHCL Sat, 21 Jun 2008 15:25:32 +0000 http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2008/06/blind-strikes-and-double-strikes.html#comment-3720 I'm interested in how rare you think the "double strike" is. I usually see one per voir dire. I just tried a case where the defense attorney announced to me that she didn't like attorneys on a jury, which is a sentiment I agree with. However, I wasn't entirely sure if she was saying that honestly or trying to make me fail to use my peremptories. Only one ended up being in the strike range (and was clearly going to be a defense strike), but had we reached the other two, I probably would have struck them as a precaution (rather than rely on my opponent to have done it). I’m interested in how rare you think the “double strike” is. I usually see one per voir dire. I just tried a case where the defense attorney announced to me that she didn’t like attorneys on a jury, which is a sentiment I agree with. However, I wasn’t entirely sure if she was saying that honestly or trying to make me fail to use my peremptories. Only one ended up being in the strike range (and was clearly going to be a defense strike), but had we reached the other two, I probably would have struck them as a precaution (rather than rely on my opponent to have done it).

]]>