Right to trial by jury court cases

By Micah Schwartzbach , Attorney. Criminal defendants are entitled to trial by jury—under most circumstances. For information on juvenile cases, see Do juveniles have a right to trial by jury? The right to trial by jury in a criminal case resides in both Article III, Section 2 of the federal Constitution "The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury" and the Sixth Amendment "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial , by an impartial jury".

But the right isn't as broad as those texts might suggest, meaning that many defendants have to settle for judge trials, where the court decides whether the defendant is guilty. According to the Supreme Court, the jury-trial right applies only when "serious" offenses are at hand—petty offenses don't invoke it.

For purposes of this right, a serious offense is one that carries a potential sentence of more than six months' imprisonment.

Baldwin v. New York , U. If the penalty is six months or less, the crime is serious only if the sum of its penalties are weighty enough. Nachtigal , U. Likewise, in another case, it decided that a first-time DUI was merely a petty offense where:. Prosecutors regularly file more than one charge against defendants. The natural question is what happens when there are multiple charges that individually carry six months or less but exceed six months when added together.

Unfortunately for defendants, the Supreme Court has held that the jury-trial right doesn't apply in this circumstance. In one case before the Court, the defendant had been charged with two counts of obstructing the mail, each count providing a maximum of six months in jail.

The Court found that the defendant had no jury-trial right. Lewis v. The Supreme Court's determination of what constitutes a serious offense and thereby entitles one to a jury trial sets a minimum standard.

In other words, states must provide jury trials if an offense is serious under the Court's standard. But they are free to guarantee jury trials to defendants when the crimes aren't sufficiently serious under the federal standard.

Benitez v. Dunevant , Ariz. It's possible that the decision as to whether to go to trial will rest largely on whether a judge or a jury will be the fact finder. To learn about the applicable law in your jurisdiction, consult an experienced criminal defense lawyer.

Such a lawyer can also inform you of any other relevant considerations. The information provided on this site is not legal advice, does not constitute a lawyer referral service, and no attorney-client or confidential relationship is or will be formed by use of the site. The attorney listings on this site are paid attorney advertising. In some states, the information on this website may be considered a lawyer referral service. Please reference the Terms of Use and the Supplemental Terms for specific information related to your state.

Talk to a Lawyer. Grow Your Legal Practice. Justice Byron White wrote in the Court's decision:. Consequently, the Court threw out the guilty verdict. By the way, a petit jury refers to any trial jury, as opposed to a grand jury, which does not try cases, but delivers indictments.

Petit, of course, means small. So, petit jury - grand jury. Get it? You can read more about grand juries on the Grand Jury Clause page here. The Supreme Court's decision in a case called Blakely vs. Washington sent shockwaves throughout the state and federal judicial systems.

In this case a man was given a 90 year sentence for kidnapping his estranged wife. This sentence fit within the federal government's sentencing guidelines. However, the facts, as determined by the jury, only called for a maximum sentence of 53 years.

The defendant claimed that his 6th Amendment right to have a jury determine the facts of which he was guilty had been violated. The Court agreed. Justice Antonin Scalia made this statement in the Court's opinion, referring to an earlier case in the state of Washington:.

A reviewing court will reverse the sentence if it finds that "under a clearly erroneous standard there is insufficient evidence in the record to support the reasons for imposing an exceptional sentence. Consequently, the Court threw out the lengthy sentence.

The Blakely case threw the judiciary into confusion because many, many sentences were determined in the same way the judge in this case determined the sentence. Some people thought the entire federal sentencing guidelines would have to be redrawn and many people already sentenced and serving time would have to be resentenced.

Justice Scalia made clear in his ruling that the jury must determine the facts of which the criminal is accused. He also said that this did not eliminate the judge's ability to increase the length of the sentence, as long as there were specific facts to justify the length, and as long as the sentence did not go past the maximum federal guidelines.

Read more about the history and meaning of the Right to Trial by Jury Clause here. Read more about the history and meaning of the 6th Amendment here. If you would like to read about the meanings of each amendment, go to the First Ten Amendments page here.

Preamble to the Bill of Rights Learn about the 1st Amendment here. Learn about the 2nd Amendment here. Learn about the 3rd Amendment here. Learn about the 4th Amendment here. Learn about the 5th Amendment here. Learn about the 6th Amendment here. Learn about the 7th Amendment here. Learn about the 8th Amendment here. Learn about the 9th Amendment here. Learn about the 10th Amendment here. Read the Bill of Rights here. Return to Right to Trial by Jury Clause.

Are you ready for shortages? Or storms? Or worse?