HON. OMAR A. WILLIAMS’S STANDING ORDER
ON JURY SELECTION
The Federal Jury Selection and Service Act (“JSSA”) provides that all litigants in
federal court entitled to a trial “shall have the right to grand and petit juries selected at
random from a fair cross section of the community in the district or division wherein the
court convenes.” 28 U.S.C. § 1861. In criminal cases, a defendant’s Sixth Amendment
right to a jury trial includes as an essential component “the selection of a petit jury from a
representative cross section of the community.” Taylor v. Louisiana, 419 U.S. 522, 528
(1975). As stated by the Supreme Court of the United States, the fair-cross-section
requirement in jury selection is “fundamental to the American system of justice.” Id. at
529. In furtherance of this goal, this court requires that, upon the conclusion of individual
voir dire for any prospective juror, such individual must be selected or struck (pursuant to
a peremptory challenge, or, where warranted, for cause), prior to commencing voir dire
on any subsequent member of the jury pool. Once again, after each potential juror’s
individual voir dire, such person either will be excused or empaneled before another
potential juror is questioned. The court will not delay the use of peremptory challenges
until after the entire jury pool (or any subset thereof) has been questioned. However,
before such individual voir dire takes place, the court will consider any potential juror’s
claim that they cannot or should not serve on that particular trial’s jury.
I. Jury Selection Process
During its orientation by the jury clerk, the pool of potential jurors will be given a
list of each party’s counsel, counsel’s colleagues, and potential witnesses for their review,
in addition to a voir dire questionnaire prepared by the court (based on the questions
1
proposed by the parties). Once the potential jurors are invited into the courtroom, the
court briefly will describe the case and the anticipated trial schedule. From there, the
parties will be permitted to introduce themselves. Thereafter, the court will inquire
whether anything discussed up to that point (the nature of the case, the people involved,
or the timing of trial, for example) is likely to prevent their ability to serve on the jury.
Those raising concerns about their prospective service will be considered by the court
outside the presence of the remainder of the pool. This method preserves the privacy of
those with hardships, and excuses them quickly. Those who presented concerns either
will be excused from service or will be returned to the pool for individual voir dire; those
not excused will be returned to the courtroom (in an order determined by the court and
based upon their randomly-assigned juror number) for additional individual questioning.
Again, the remaining pool of potential jurors will be questioned individually. The
court will provide the parties with copies of the questionnaires that were completed by the
potential jurors earlier in the morning. The parties (in alternating order) will be permitted
to reasonably follow up with additional questions of their own. After being questioned,
each potential juror will be asked to step outside the courtroom and the parties will be
asked whether they find the potential juror acceptable, or whether they wish to challenge
their service. Then the prospective juror will be invited back into the courtroom, and the
court will inform them whether they have been selected or excused from service. The
first party to question a prospective juror will be the first party asked whether that potential
juror is acceptable for service, and the parties will alternate who starts the questioning of
each potential juror. In other words, if a potential juror is questioned first by the
prosecution (or plaintiff, in a civil case), then the prosecution (or plaintiff) will be the first
2
party to state whether the juror is acceptable to serve. The next potential juror will be
questioned first by the defense, with the defense being the first to state whether that
potential juror is acceptable for service. We will continue in this alternating manner until
the jury is chosen. As always, the alternate jurors will not be aware of their status as an
alternate until the close of evidence.
II. Objections to the Process
If either party objects to the court’s method of jury selection, such objection must
be filed seven (7) days prior to the pretrial scheduling conference, and it also must contain
the legal authority supporting such objection.
IT IS SO ORDERED. Entered at Hartford, Connecticut, this 16th day of February,
2023.
____________/s/__ _________
OMAR A. WILLIAMS
United States District Judge
3
