HANDBOOK
FOR TRIAL
JURORS
SERVING IN THE
UNITED STATES
DISTRICT
COURTS
Prepared for the use of trial jurors serving
in the United States district courts under the
supervision of the Judicial Conference of the
United States. Published by the Administrative
Office of the United States Courts, Washington,
D.C. 20544.
Purpose of This Handbook
The purpose of this handbook is to acquaint
trial jurors with the general nature and importance
of their role as jurors. It explains some of the
language and procedures used in court, and it
offers some suggestions helpful to jurors in
performing this important public service.
Nothing in this handbook is to be regarded by
jurors as instructions of law to be applied by them
in any case in which they serve. The judge will
instruct the jury in each separate case as to the law
of that case. For example, in each criminal case,
the judge will tell the jury, among other things, that
a defendant charged with a crime is presumed to
be innocent and the burden of proving his guilt
beyond a reasonable doubt is upon the
Government. Jurors must follow only the
instructions of law given to them by the trial judge
in each particular case.
Importance of Jury Service
Jurors perform a vital role in the American
system of justice. The protection of our rights and
liberties is largely achieved through the teamwork
of judge and jury who, working together in a
common effort, put into practice the principles of
our great heritage of freedom. The judge
determines the law to be applied in the case while
the jury decides the facts. Thus, in a very
important way, jurors become a part of the court
itself.
Jurors must be men and women possessed of
sound judgment, absolute honesty, and a complete
sense of fairness. Jury service is a high duty of
citizenship. Jurors aid in the maintenance of law
and order and uphold justice among their fellow
citizens. Their greatest reward is the knowledge
that they have discharged this duty faithfully,
honorably, and well. In addition to determining
and adjusting property rights, jurors may also be
asked to decide questions involving a crime for
1
which a person may be fined, placed on probation,
or confined in prison. In a very real sense,
therefore, the people must rely upon jurors for the
protection of life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness.
The Courts
In this country, there are two systems of
courts. They are the courts of the individual 50
States and the District of Columbia and the courts
of the Federal Government. This book is written
for jurors selected to serve in the trial court of the
Federal Government, the United States District
Court. The types of cases which can be brought in
this court have been fixed by the United States
Congress according to our Federal Constitution.
Cases in the United States District Courts are
divided into two general classes. These are called
criminal cases and civil cases.
Criminal cases are those in which individuals
or organizations are charged with breaking the
criminal laws. Typical criminal charges in a federal
court are those involving violation of the federal
income tax and narcotics laws, mail theft, and
counterfeiting.
Civil cases are suits in which persons who
disagree over their rights and duties come into
court to settle the matter. A typical example of a
civil case is one involving a broken contract. One
party may claim that it should be paid under the
terms of the contract, while the other side may
assert a defense to the claim, such as the lack of a
binding contract. The court is asked to decide who
is right. This depends on the law as laid down by
the judge and the facts as decided by the jury.
The Criminal Case
The person charged with a violation of the
law is the defendant. The charge against the
defendant may be brought in two ways. One way
is by means of an indictment; the other is by an
2
information.
An indictment is a written accusation by a
grand jury that charges the defendant with
committing an offense against the law. Each
offense charged will usually be set forth in a
separate count of the indictment.
An information is the name given to a written
charge against the defendant filed by the United
States Attorney and not by the grand jury. But
even in cases where the defendant has the right to
have a grand jury consider the charges presented,
the defendant may agree to give up this right and
consent to the filing of an information.
After the indictment or information is filed,
the defendant appears in open court where the
court advises the defendant of the charge and asks
whether the defendant pleads “guilty” or “not
guilty.” This procedure is called the arraignment.
No trial is needed if the defendant pleads
guilty and admits to committing the crime. But if
the defendant pleads not guilty he or she will then
be placed on trial.
The judge in a criminal case tells the jury
what the law is. The jury must determine what the
true facts are. On that basis the jury has only to
determine whether the defendant is guilty or not
guilty as to each offense charged. What happens
thereafter is not for the jury’s consideration, but is
the sole responsibility of the judge. In other words,
the sentence is not to be considered in any way by
the jury in arriving at an impartial verdict as to the
guilt or innocence of the defendant.
The jury must consider separately each of the
charges against the defendant, after which it may
find the person: not guilty of any of the charges,
guilty of all the charges, or guilty of some of the
charges and not guilty of others.
The Civil Case
The following is an example of the kind of
3
civil case jurors in a United States District Court
will help decide.
Let us call the case John Smith v. XY
Company. This means that John Smith has filed a
case against the XY Company.
John Smith is called the plaintiff, the person
who begins the case. The XY Company is the
defendant. The plaintiff and the defendant are the
parties.
The plaintiff, John Smith, states his claim in a
paper called the complaint. The defendant, XY
Company, replies to the complaint in a paper called
the answer. The complaint and the answer are the
main pleadings in the case. The points in the
pleadings upon which the parties disagree make up
the issues of fact and law. Sometimes these issues
are set forth in a pre-trial order. This is an order
drawn up by the judge after consulting with the
attorneys for the parties.
The Voir Dire Examination
To begin a jury trial, a panel of prospective
jurors is called into the courtroom. This panel will
include a number of persons from whom a jury
will be selected to try the case. In criminal trials,
alternate jurors may be chosen to take the place of
jurors who become ill during the trial.
The panel members are sworn to answer
questions about their qualifications to sit as jurors
in the case. This questioning process is called the
voir dire. This is an examination conducted by the
judge and sometimes includes participation by
counsel. A deliberately untruthful answer to any
fair question could result in serious punishment to
the person making it.
The voir dire examination opens with a short
statement about the case. The purpose is to
inform the jurors of what the case is about and to
identify the parties and their lawyers.
Questions are then asked to find out whether
4
any individuals on the panel have any personal
interest in the case or know of any reason why
they cannot render an impartial verdict. The court
also wants to know whether any member of the
panel is related to or personally acquainted with
the parties, their lawyers, or the witnesses who will
appear during trial. Other questions will
determine whether any panel members have a
prejudice or a feeling that might influence them in
rendering a verdict. Any juror having knowledge of
the case should explain this to the judge.
Parties on either side may ask that a member
of the panel be excused or exempted from service
on a particular jury. These requests, or demands,
are called challenges.
A person may be challenged for cause if the
examination shows he or she might be prejudiced.
The judge will excuse an individual from the panel
if the cause raised in the challenge is sufficient.
There is no limit to the number of challenges for
cause which either party may make.
The parties also have a right to a certain
number of challenges for which no cause is
necessary. These are called peremptory
challenges. Each side usually has a predetermined
number of peremptory challenges. The
peremptory challenge is a legal right long
recognized by law as a means of giving both sides
some choice in the make-up of a jury. Jurors
should clearly understand that being eliminated
from the jury panel by a peremptory challenge is
no reflection upon their ability or integrity.
In some courts the peremptory challenges are
made openly in the hearing of the jury. In others,
they are made from the jury list out of the jury’s
sight.
The Jurors’ Solemn Oath
After the voir dire is completed, the jurors
selected to try the case will be sworn in. The judge
or the clerk will state to the jury:
5
“Members of the Jury, you will rise, hold up
your right hands, and be sworn to try this case.”
The jurors then rise and hold up their right
hands. The jurors face the judge or the clerk who
is to administer the oath. That official slowly,
solemnly, and clearly repeats the oath. The jurors
indicate by their responses and upraised hands
that they take this solemn oath.
Jurors not wishing to take an oath may
request to affirm instead of swear. In some
districts the jury is sworn upon the Bible and not
by uplifted hand.
The Eight Stages of Trial
The trial proceeds when the jury has been
sworn. There are usually eight stages of trial in
civil cases. They are:
(1) The lawyers present opening statements.
Sometimes the opening statements on
behalf of one or more parties are
omitted.
(2) Plaintiff calls witnesses and produces
evidence to prove its case.
(3) Defendant may call witnesses and
produce evidence to disprove the
plaintiffs case and to prove the
defendant’s claims.
(4) Plaintiff may call rebuttal witnesses to
disprove what was said by the
defendant’s witnesses.
(5) Closing arguments are made by the
lawyer on each side.
(6) The judge instructs or charges the jury
as to the law.
(7) The jury retires to deliberate.
(8) The jury reaches its verdict.
During the trial, witnesses called by either
6
side may be cross-examined by the lawyers on the
other side.
Throughout the trial, the judge may be asked
in the presence of the jury to decide questions of
law. Usually these questions concern objections to
testimony that either side wants to present.
Occasionally, the judge may ask jurors to leave the
courtroom briefly while the lawyers present their
legal arguments for and against such objections.
The law requires that the judge decide such
questions.
A ruling by the judge does not indicate that
the judge is taking sides. He or she is merely
saying, in effect, that the law does, or else does
not, permit that question to be asked.
It is possible that the judge may decide every
objection favorably to the plaintiff or the
defendant. That does not mean the case should be
decided by the jury for the plaintiff or the
defendant. Even where the judge decides every
objection favorably to the plaintiff or the
defendant, the jury should maintain its objectivity
and base its verdict strictly upon the testimony and
exhibits received in evidence at trial.
The juror takes an oath to decide the case
“upon the law and the evidence.” The law is what
the judge declares the law to be. The evidence
which you will consider consists of the testimony
of witnesses and the exhibits admitted in evidence.
What evidence is proper for the jury to consider is
based upon the law of evidence.
The Arguments of Counsel
After presentation of the evidence is
completed, the lawyers have the opportunity to
discuss the evidence in their closing arguments.
This helps the jurors recall testimony that might
have slipped their memory.
The chief purpose of the argument is to
present the evidence in logical and comprehensible
7
order. The lawyers fit the different parts of the
testimony together and connect up the facts.
It must be remembered that each attorney
presents the view of the case that is most favorable
to his or her own client. Each lawyer’s side
appears to be right to that lawyer. Each lawyer’s
statement may be balanced by the statement of
the lawyers on the other side.
The Charge to the Jury
The charge of a judge to a jury in a United
States District Court frequently is much more than
a statement of the rules of law. Sometimes it may
contain a summary of the facts or some of the
facts.
It is the jury’s duty to reach its own
conclusion. This is done upon the evidence. The
verdict is reached without regard to what may be
the opinion of the judge as to the facts, though as
to the law the judge’s charge controls.
The judge may point out and may also
explain what basic facts are in dispute, and what
facts do not actually matter in the case. In other
words, the judge may try to direct the jury’s
attention to the real merits of the case and
impartially summarize the evidence bearing on the
questions of fact. The judge will state the law
related to the facts presented to the jury.
The Jury’s Verdict
In both civil and criminal cases, it is the jury’s
duty to decide the facts in accordance with the
principles of law laid down in the judge’s charge to
the jury. The decision is made on the evidence
introduced, and the jury’s decision on the facts is
usually final.
Courtroom Etiquette
A court session begins when the court official
raps for order. Everyone in the court rises. The
judge takes his or her place on the bench, and the
8
court official announces the opening of court. A
similar procedure is used when court adjourns.
Common courtesy and politeness are safe
guides as to the way jurors should act. Of course,
no juror will be permitted to read a newspaper or
magazine in the courtroom. Nor should a juror
carry on a conversation with another juror in the
courtroom during the trial.
Jurors will be treated with consideration.
Their comfort and convenience will be served
whenever possible. They should bring to the
attention of the judge any matter affecting their
service and should notify the court of any
emergencies. In the event of a personal
emergency, a juror may send word to the judge
through any court personnel, or may ask to see the
judge privately.
Conduct of the Jury during the Trial
Jurors should give close attention to the
testimony. They are sworn to disregard their
prejudices and follow the court’s instructions. They
must render a verdict according to their best
judgment.
Each juror should keep an open mind.
Human experience shows that, once persons come
to a preliminary conclusion as to a set of facts, they
hesitate to change their views. Therefore, it is wise
for jurors not to even attempt to make up their
mind on the facts of a case until all the evidence
has been presented to them, and they have been
instructed on the law applicable to the case.
Similarly, jurors should not discuss the case even
among themselves until it is finally concluded.
During the trial the jury may hear references
to the rules of evidence. Some of these rules may
appear strange to a person who is not a lawyer.
However, each rule has a purpose. The rules have
evolved from hundreds of years of experience in
the trial of cases.
9
The mere fact that a lawsuit was begun is not
evidence in a case. The opening and closing
statements of the lawyers are not evidence. A juror
should disregard any statements made by a lawyer
in argument that have not been proved by the
evidence. A juror should also disregard any
statement by a lawyer as to the law of the case if it
is not in accord with the judge’s instructions.
Jurors are expected to use all the experience,
common sense and common knowledge they
possess. But they are not to rely on any private
source of information. Thus they should be
careful, during the trial, not to discuss the case at
home or elsewhere. Information that a juror gets
from a private source may be only half true, or
biased or inaccurate. It may be irrelevant to the
case at hand. At any rate, it is only fair that the
parties have a chance to know and comment upon
all the facts that matter in the case.
If it develops during the trial that a juror
learns elsewhere of some fact about the case, he or
she should inform the court. The juror should not
mention any such matter in the jury room.
Individual jurors should never inspect the
scene of an accident or of any event in the case. If
an inspection is necessary, the judge will have the
jurors go as a group to the scene.
Jurors must not talk about the case with
others not on the jury, even their spouses or
families, and must not read about the case in the
newspapers. They should avoid radio and
television broadcasts that might mention the case.
The jury’s verdict must be based on nothing else
but the evidence and law presented to them in
court.
Breaking these rules is likely to confuse a
juror. It may be hard to separate in one’s mind the
court testimony and reports coming from other
sources.
Jurors should not loiter in the corridors or
10
vestibules of the courthouse. Embarrassing
contacts may occur there with persons interested
in the case. If juror identification badges are
provided, they should be worn in the courthouse at
all times.
If any outsider attempts to talk with a juror
about a case in which he or she is sitting, the juror
should do the following:
(1) Tell the person it is improper for a juror
to discuss the case or receive any
information except in the courtroom.
(2) Refuse to listen if the outsider persists.
(3) Report the incident at once to the judge.
Jurors have the duty to report to the judge any
improper behavior by any juror. They also have
the duty to inform the judge of any outside
communication or improper conduct directed at
the jury by any person.
Jurors on a case should refrain from talking
on any subject--even if it is not related to the
matter being tried--with any lawyer, witness, or
party in the case. Such contact may make a new
trial necessary.
Some cases may arouse much public
discussion. In that event the jury may be kept
together until the verdict is reached. This
procedure is used to protect the jurors against
outside influences.
In the Jury Room
In some districts the judge selects the
foreperson of the jury. In other districts the jurors
elect their foreperson and in still other districts the
first juror to enter the jury box becomes the
foreperson automatically. The judge will inform
jurors which method is used in the district.
The foreperson presides over the jury’s
deliberations and must give every juror a fair
opportunity to express his or her views.
11
Jurors must enter the discussion with open
minds. They should freely exchange views. They
should not hesitate to change their opinions if the
deliberations have convinced them they were
wrong initially.
In a criminal case all jurors must agree on the
verdict. This is also required in a civil case, unless
the jury is otherwise instructed by the court.
The jurors have a duty to give full
consideration to the opinion of their fellow jurors.
They have an obligation to reach a verdict
whenever possible. However, no juror is required
to give up any opinion which he or she is
convinced is correct.
It would be dishonest for a judge to decide a
case by tossing a coin. It would be just as
dishonest for a juror to do so.
The members of the jury are sworn to pass
judgment on the facts in a particular case. They
have no concern beyond that case. They violate
their oath if they render their decision on the basis
of the effect their verdict may have on other
situations.
After the Trial
After the jurors return their verdict and are
dismissed by the judge, they are free to go about
their normal affairs, although in some districts
jurors must check with jury office personnel to see
if their service is concluded. They are under no
obligation to speak to any person about the case
and may refuse all requests for interviews or
comments. Nevertheless, the court may enter an
order in a specific case that during any such
interview, jurors may not give any information with
respect to the vote of any other juror.
Conclusion
To decide cases correctly, jurors must be
honest and intelligent. They must have both
12
integrity and good judgment. The jury system is
based on these attributes. The continued vitality of
the jury system depends on them.
To meet their responsibility, jurors must
decide the facts and apply the law impartially.
They must not favor the rich or the poor. They
must treat alike all men and women, corporations
and individuals. Justice should be rendered to all
persons without regard to race, color, religion or
sex.
The performance of jury service is the
fulfillment of a high civic obligation. Conscientious
service brings its own reward in the satisfaction of
an important task well done. There is no more
valuable work that the average citizen can perform
in support of our Government than the full and
honest discharge of jury duty.
The effectiveness of the democratic system
itself is largely measured by the integrity, the
intelligence, and the general quality of citizenship
of the jurors who serve in our courts.
13
Administrative Office
of the
United States Courts
Washington, D.C. 20544
HB100
