Is it true that jury members can disobey a judge's instructions?
For example, if a judge advises a jury that if they find certain facts true, then they have to rule a certain way, cannot the jury simply exercise "jury nullification" and vote "innocent" based upon the grounds that a law is corrupt or unconstitutional?
Of course, no judge would advise a jury of that power, but I do believe that historically it has happened and is a sound practice.
Thoughts?
(I'm thinking myself, being a supporter of the 2nd Amendment's "...Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms..." that I'll always vote "innocent" on any weapons charge brought against anyone.)
Answers:
You'll always vote innocent on ANY weapons charge brought against ANYone?
Yikes.
My husband was shot by a psychopath on a bus. I'm sure glad you weren't on that jury.
You would be surprised at how jurors misinterpret what the judge counsels them.
There is something called "Juror nullification", where the jurors decide to rule a certain way, despite the facts of the case presented, or the rules the judge had recited to them.
Think "OJ Criminal Trial."
I'll be curious to hear about whether jury members can *legally* disobey a judge's instructions; I hadn't thought they could. As for your example about always voting "innocent" on weapons charges, at the start of jury selection you take an oath to answer honestly. Hopefully if either attorney asks if members of the jury pool feel strongly about the right to bear arms, you would fulfill that oath and admit that you do. At that point, if they select you for the jury, they know what they're getting.
So..a gang banger with a gun robs an elderly man at gunpoint of his money. The robbery carries a six year sentence and because he used a gun the law adds another three years. You would find him innocent because of the 2nd amendment?
yes, jury nullification is legal and is a strong and vital tradition in US courts.
it basically means that the jury finds the law to be wrong, and refuses to convict no matter what the facts are.
many claim that is it illegal, but a jury can do whatever it wants to do.
[but as far as the 2nd amendment goes, there are limitations, if someone uses a weapon in a crime, for example. and the 2nd amendment talks about "a well-regulated" militia, not the right of a random joe shmoe to own guns. :-) ]
I had never heard of jury nullification so had to look it up. Thanks for bringing it to my attention!
Some thoughts on your comments.
First off you should and you are compelled to tell the judge of any predispositions that you have for weapons charges or other crimes. You are not qualified to be a fair juror with that disposition and you should not serve on a jury because of it.
Jury nullification does occur and the jury will rule in ways that the law says it shouldn't. A judge would be improper in telling the jury about this and it would be grounds for a retrial or appeal. Generally if the judge were to do something that extreme the prosecutions would motion for a mistrial and try to bring the case again.
Third your claim that it is unconstitutional does not prove to be entirely accurate. Although the second amendment does allow one to keep and bear arms, this only applies to the federal governments inability to take away this right. Generally what happens though is after the 14th amendment was passed most aspects of the bill of rights (first 10 amendments) were incorporated to include state actions as well. However this is one of the rare occasions it was not incorporated. Meaning the 2d. amendment does not apply to state's action. Therefore the claim of unconstitutionality isn't entirely appropriate.
Yes it is the right of the jury members to disobey the judge.
It is a right that some jury members fail to exercise.
jurors have the POWER but not the authority to refuse to convict. They have the power because the double jeopardy clause precludes a new trial, not matter how wrong the jury is, and so any appeal by the government is moot and thus cannot be heard. I wonder if your view of firearms would apply to a tank or a cannon or just to the kind that criminals are likely to use. If your view is that you will always vote not guilty for being an ex[felon with a concealed firearm, and you lie about that during the jury selection process, then that makes you a perjurer, a criminal.
The answers post by the user, for information only, FreeLawAnswer.com does not guarantee the right.
Answer question:
More Law Questions and Answers: