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

1 Reynolds Ct. & Media L.J. 307 (2011)
Jury Instructions for the Modern Age: A 50-State Survey of Jury Instructions on Internet and Social Media

handle is hein.journals/reycome1 and id is 345 raw text is: Jury Instructions for the Modern Age: A 50-State Survey of Jury Instructions on Internet and Social Media Eric P Robinson1 Juror use of the Internet and social media during trial has been a growing concern of the bench and bar for the past several years. A recent study by Reuters of reported cases on Westlaw found 90 verdicts called into question since 1999 because ofjurors' online activi- ties. More than half the cases are from the last two years. In 28 of the cases, 21 of them since January 2009, new trials were granted or verdicts were overturned.2 Juror use of this media may take several forms: jurors conducting independent research on the case on the Internet; sending e-mails, text messages, Tweets or other communica- tion conveying developments in a trial or deliberations; or using the camera feature of mobile technology to record courtroom proceedings. In response to this growing concern - and a growing number of mistrials in some cases due to improper juror use of technology - several states have adopted or proposed rules or statutes that would explicitly limit such activity by jurors. Courts have also responded to this trend with including partial or complete bans of cell- phones and similar electronic devices from courtrooms and even entire courthouses. Many jurisdictions have also altered their jury instructions to tell jurors about the limitations on use of these devices during voir dire, trial and deliberations. And while many of these efforts have been comprehensive within their respective jurisdictions, the overall American landscape is speckled with inconsistency and outright silence on the vexing ques- tion of how best to handle the growing problems of smart devices and social media as they 1. Special thanks to Journal Board of Editors member Nancy Rapoport, a professor at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas William S. Boyd School of Law; Jeanne F. Price (Director), Jennifer Gross, and Chad Schatzle of the Wiener-Rogers Law Library at the Boyd School of Law; Blake F. Quackenbush, a stu- dent at the Boyd law school; Adeen Postar, Deputy Director of the Pence Law Library at the American University Washington College of Law; Karen Salaz, District Administrator of Colorado's 19th Judicial District; Leigh Anne Hiatt, Public Information Officer with the Office of Public Information of Admin- istrative Office of the Courts in Kentucky; and Dean P. Land, Legal Publications Attorney, Oregon State Bar, for their assistance with the research for this article. Thanks also to University of Neavada Associ- ate Professor Swart Cheifet for his comments. 2. Brian Grow, As jurors go online, U.S. trials go off track, REUTERS LEGAL, Dec. 8, 2010, http://w rit ers.omarticle/'2010/12/08/internet-iurors-idUSN081654712010120S. REYNOLDS COURTS & MEDIA LAW JOURNAL 307

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