Monday, October 02, 2023

You Have Questions. We Pretend To Have Answers.

Query: is there any case law or anything that explains why rights to things like jury trial (NY, Fed) or speedy trial (GA) must be actively asserted, as opposed to being automatic? Just curious, since it was a paperwork failure on his team's part that made this a bench trial...
Well, the Sixth Amendment speaks to criminal trials:
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

It’s my understanding that’s read to mean the defendant must affirmatively waive a jury trial, in court, before the judge (mostly so it’s public and defendant can’t claim his Sixth Amendment rights were denied him by the court.)  Speedy trial is held to lie with the defendant, who may or may not want one. An automatic speedy trial, IOW, can sometimes be an injustice by denying due process.

I’m not sure about case law on civil trials, but all the rules of civil procedure I’m familiar with (granted, that’s not saying much) require a request for a jury trial early in the proceedings, or it’s waived. The practice I was familiar with was to request a jury if you’re the plaintiff filing suit, at the time you initiate the suit. If you’re a defendant and want a jury trial, you file the request along with your original answer (first defense pleading filed in a case).

Failure to timely make the request is tantamount to malpractice.

My legal assumption is, the 6th doesn’t apply to civil cases, so jury trials are not automatic there. You get one if you ask, but if you don’t ask....

(I almost tried one jury case, as the plaintiff. We settled the day we were to start jury selection. I’m pretty sure I requested a jury with the Original Petition (first filing a plaintiff makes in Texas courts). I’ll just say in the firm we all called it “the wedding dress case,” and one partner disgustedly called it a “Judge Wopner case.” And leave it at that.)

Ah yes, crim/civ distinction makes perfect sense, thank you. And as far as speedy trials, we know a certain defendant who definitely doesn't want one in any venue (IIRC, you can't waive unilaterally at Fed level).

I'm tempted to agree with Ted Lieu and other commenters that he deliberately didn't demand a jury so he would play to his base. Too cynical by half...

Well, the defendant can't demand his trial take place in 10 years or so (as Trump has basically done).  Matters of judicial economy (use of the courts, basically) and the state's interest in prosecuting crime, override that option.  So Trump is certainly getting speedier trials than he wants.

I think you and Lieu, et al., may be right about that failure to demand a jury.  It's certainly malpractice, yet Trump isn't complaining about it.  Curious, that.... 

3 comments:

  1. Ah yes, crim/civ distinction makes perfect sense, thank you. And as far as speedy trials, we know a certain defendant who definitely doesn't want one in any venue (IIRC, you can't waive unilaterally at Fed level).

    I'm tempted to agree with Ted Lieu and other commenters that he deliberately didn't demand a jury so he would play to his base. Too cynical by half...

    ReplyDelete
  2. Worth noting that the seventh amendment guarantees in "Suits at common law...the right to trial by jury...", but that's a pretty weak guarantee. IIRC, the seventh amendment has not been applied to the States through the fourteenth amendment. Cases in equity are not "Suits at common law," and fraud, historically sounds in equity, not law, where juries are not used, except in an advisory capacity (the "union of law and equity" in most modern jurisdictions makes application of the constitutional standard more complex). My own work in water right adjudications involves what is called locally a "special statutory proceeding" which, being unknown to common law, is not touched by state or federal requirements regarding jury trials.

    But that's neither here nor there, of course, since every law student in first year Civil Procedure learns that if you want a civil jury you have to file a jury demand with, or within a short time after filing, your complaint or petition.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Yeah, you're right, the 7th hasn't been incorporated, although I think most (if not all) state constitutions have provisions for civil jury rights. What I'm interested in is the "preserved" language of the amendment. Is that the basis for juries not being strictly necessary? I need to look at the scant case law more...

    ReplyDelete