Discuss the significance of Ballew v. Georgia with respect to its effect on jury size.
What will be an ideal response?
As you might have guessed, once the Court ruled that six-person juries were allowed, the Court would be asked to consider whether even smaller juries were constitutional. In Ballew v. Georgia (1978), the Court unanimously held that six was the fewest number of jurors permissible. The Court based this holding on research that smaller juries have less collective recall of trial testimony, are less likely to "foster effective group deliberation," and are less likely to be representative of the community or include racial or ethnic minorities. While acknowledging that there is no clear distinction between five- and six-person juries, the Court held that juries with fewer than six members were unconstitutional.
You might also like to view...
Longitudinal studies take place at a single point in time
a. True b. False
Which of the following is not a component of a felony offense?
a. Offenders will spend more than a year behind bars b. Offenses can result in a fine c. Offenders can become disenfranchised d. Offender is not subjected to jail time
Ignatieff (2004) argued that a democracy responding to terrorism without destroying the values for which it stands would:
a. Prohibit certain torture b. Prohibit illegal detention c. Prohibit unlawful assassination d. All of the above
Requests of counsel to an appellate court seeking additional time to file a law brief or asking for expedited consideration of an appeal are generally effectuated by filing a written _______ with the appellate court
Fill in the blank(s) with correct word