TRIAL BY JURY

Evening Post, Volume CIX, Issue 120, 23 May 1930, Page 8

TRIAL BY JURY

POSITION IN AMERICA

WAIVING OF FULL TWELVE

(From "The Post's" Representative) NEW YORK, Ist May.

The Supremev Court of the United States has just laid down the rule that a defendant in a criminal proceeding may waive trial by a constitutional jury, and submit to trial by a jury of fewer than twelve persons, or by the Court. The Court was emphatic in asserting that "trial by a constitutional jury must be jealously preserved," and that the duty of a Trial Court in that regard "is not to be discharged as a mere matter of note," but with "an eye to avoid .unreasonable or undue departure from that mode of trial." In the Lower Court, three men were indicted for conspiracy to br|be a Federal Prohibition agent, when one juror, because of illness, was unable to serve further. The Government and the defence consented to proceed with the eleven remaining jurors. The men were convicted, and appealed. The Circuit Court of Appeals, in doubt as to the law, sent the case to the Supreme Court, asking if the parties were authorised to waive trial a.nd verdict by a constitutional jury of twleve. .

"The view that power to waive a trial by jury in criminal cases should be denied on grounds of public policy must be rejected as unsound," said the Supreme Court in its judgment. .In affirming the power of tho defendant in any criminal case to waive a trial by a constitutional jury and submit to trial by a jury of less than twelve persons or by the Court, we do not mean to hold that the waiver must be put into effect at all events. Trial by jury is the normal and, with occasional exceptions, the preferable mode of disposing of issues of fact in criminal cases : bove the grade of petty offences. "Not only must the right of the accused to a trial by a constitutional ■jury be jealously preserved, - but the maintenance of the-jury as a f aet-hndmg body in criminal cases is of such importance and has such a place in our traditions that before any waiver can become effective the consent of Government counsel and the sanction of the court must be had, in addition to the expressed and intelligent consent of the defendant." . This is the first time the issue had been before the Supreme Court. i