Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Arizona jury reform (1)
- Civil trials (1)
- Expert testimony (1)
- Judge MtDNA Study (1)
- Jury MtDNA Study (1)
-
- Jury Trial Innovations (1)
- Jury competence (1)
- Jury comprehension of scientific evidence (1)
- Jury decision making (1)
- Jury deliberations (1)
- Jury reforms (1)
- Jury trial discussions (1)
- Jury trial innovations (1)
- Mitochondrial DNA (1)
- MtDNA evidence (1)
- Scientific evidence (1)
- State v. Pappas (1)
- United States v. Wexler (1)
- Winebrenner v. United States (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Judges
The Arizona Jury Reform Permitting Civil Jury Trial Discussions: The View Of Trial Participants, Judges, And Jurors, Valerie P. Hans, Paula Hannaford-Agor, G. Thomas Munsterman
The Arizona Jury Reform Permitting Civil Jury Trial Discussions: The View Of Trial Participants, Judges, And Jurors, Valerie P. Hans, Paula Hannaford-Agor, G. Thomas Munsterman
Valerie P. Hans
In 1995, the Arizona Supreme Court reformed the jury trial process by allowing civil jurors to discuss the evidence presented during trial prior to their formal deliberations. This Article examines the theoretical, legal, and policy issues raised by this reform and presents the early results of a field experiment that tested the impact of trial discussions. Jurors, judges, attorneys, and litigants in civil jury trials in Arizona were questioned regarding their observations, experiences, and reactions during trial as well as what they perceived to be the benefits and drawback of juror discussions. The data revealed that the majority of judges …
Judges, Juries, And Scientific Evidence, Valerie P. Hans
Judges, Juries, And Scientific Evidence, Valerie P. Hans
Valerie P. Hans
The rise in scientific evidence offered in American jury trials, along with court rulings thrusting judges into the business of assessing the soundness of scientific evidence, have produced challenges for judge and jury alike. Many judges have taken up the duty of becoming “amateur scientists.” But what about juries? Surely they too could benefit from assistance as they attempt to master and apply complex testimony about scientific matters during the course of a trial. Concerns about the jury’s ability to understand, critically evaluate, and employ scientific evidence in deciding complex trials have led to many suggestions for reform. This article …