The Effect of Jury Size on the Probability of Conviction: An Evaluation of Williams v. Florida
![handle is hein.journals/cwrlrv22 and id is 539 raw text is: 1971]
NOTES
The Effect of Jury Size on the Probability
of Conviction: An Evaluation of Williams
v. Florida
I. INTRODUCTION
M ANY FACTORS are relevant to an analysis of a judicial decision.
Some of the more important approaches emphasize: (1) how
the new legal rules are related to preexisting law; (2) the personal
or psychological reasons for the judge's decision;1 (3) the institu-
tional context of the court, in an effort to elucidate important
strengths and weaknesses in the legal system as a whole;' (4) non-
scientific appraisals of the practical, social effects of the legal rules
1 There are many problems involved in relating the judge's personality, history,
cognitive structure, etc., to the decision he reaches in a particular case. Present models
of individual behavior are not sufficiently sophisticated to deal with such broad questions.
Even if there were a model that adequately described the judge, there would be enor-
mous problems involved in gathering the personal data necessary to use the model in a
given case. The problems that arise in both model-construction and data-gathering
are discussed in Lewis, Systems Theory and Judicial Behavioralism, 21 CASE W. RES. L.
REV. 361 (1970), which focuses particularly on a study of Justice Black.
-2The institutional context of the court can be analyzed from a number of perspec-
tives. See generally L. VON BERTALANFFY, GENERAL SYSTEMS THEORY; FOUNDA-
TIONS, DEVELOPMENT, APPLICATIONS (1969). One of the issues in this category
is the sufficiency of the adversary proceeding. The presentations are made by two or
more lawyers before judges, and rarely are any of these persons expert in fields other
than the law. The efficacy of such a format is questionable, but one cannot hastily con-
clude that another body would be more capable. One alternative is to leave more de-
cision making to the legislature, but there is no guarantee that a legislature will make
an intelligent investigation before it acts. And even when such an investigation is made,
there are strong tendencies for legislators to disregard the results and follow either
their own visceral feelings or the most expedient political route. See, e.g., J. KAPLAN,
MARIJUANA: THE NEW PROIBMON at ix-xii (1970).
Legal problems are often treated superficially, and this seems partially the fault of
the law schools. The schools are one of the most important institutions in the legal
system, but they provide little education beyond the mere art of manipulating legal
rules. Many persons have suggested that they should become more social science ori-
ented to remedy this deficiency. See, e.g., S. Fox, SCIENCE AND JusTIcE (1968);
Derham, Legal Education - A Challenge to the Profession, 43 AuSTL L.J. 530
(1969); Traynor, What Domesday Books for Emerging Law?, 15 U.C.L.A.L. REV. 1105
(1968). Some law schools have already initiated new courses that depart radically
from the narrow, traditional approach. For example, Yale Law School has instituted
a program of Law and Modernization whose goal is to combine political, social, and
economic developments into a policy of social change through the use of law. See Yale
University, Bulletin of Yale University: Yale Law School (1970).](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.journals/cwrlrv22&div=44&collection=journals&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)
What Is HeinOnline?
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most
The Effect of Jury Size on the Probability of Conviction: An Evaluation of Williams v. Florida
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most