About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

79 Judicature 266 (1995-1996)
The Impact of Sequestration on Juries

handle is hein.journals/judica79 and id is 268 raw text is: The impact of sequestration on juries Although intended to shield the jury and ensure a fair trial, sequestration's potentialfor unnerving and even infuriating jurors may in fact undermine the pursuit ofjustice. by James P. Levine W ander into the Holiday ~Inn on New York City's Staten Island most any evening and you will en- counter a rather puzzling sight. At ei- ther end of one or more corridors armed law enforcement officials will be on guard, poised to jump into ac- tion should one of the doors on the floor open. The visitor observing this scene might well proceed with trepida- tion, imagining that the room of a criminal suspect or fugitive is under surveillance. In fact, what is taking place is the routine monitoring of a se- questered jury. JAMES P. LEVINE is a professor at John Jay College, City University of New York. Jury sequestration refers to the physical isolation of the jury from the rest of society. It is the opposite of what is technically called separation of the jury, the condition that exists when 266 Judicature Volume 79, Number 5 jurors are permitted to go their sepa- rate ways when court is not in session. Sequestration can take place at two points in the judicial process, during the trial itself (a rare phenomenon) or during deliberations. Its primary pur- pose is to shield jurors from biasing outside influences that might vitiate the integrity of the trial and deprive defendants of their right to verdicts based on law and evidence. It is thus seen as an instrument to further due process of law. When sequestration is ordered, ju- rors are kept together as a group and forbidden to have significant contact with anyone but each other. Access to the media is denied or strictly limited: exposure to trial coverage is pre- vented; newspapers are banned or cen- sored; television viewing is off limits or highly restricted. Jurors are cut off from family, friends, and neighbors; they become a world onto themselves. They are confined to the courtroom or the juryroom during working hours, March-April 1996 and they are required to eat and sleep in special quarters. Court officers keep track of their every activity, sometimes even following them into bathrooms. Sex is normally off-limits, physical ac- tivity is severely constrained, and soli- tude is all but impossible. Jurors can be held in contempt of court and are subject to fines and im- prisonment if they depart from court- imposed restrictions. Says University of Texas law school professor Michael Tigar, an opponent of sequestration: There are prison systems that provide more privileges than some seques- tered jurors receive.'I It is no exag- geration to call sequestered juries pris- oners of the court. Much attention has recently been An earlier draft of this paper was delivered at the 1995 Annual Meeting of the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences, Boston, March 7-11, 1995. Thanks go to G. Thomas Munsterman and Thomas Hafemeister for their useful comments. 1. Quoted in Hansen, Sequestration Little Used, Little Liked, 81 ABAJ. 16, 17 (October 1995).

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most