Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by CoolHand on Tuesday April 21 2020, @09:28PM   Printer-friendly
from the keeping-it-legal dept.

Supreme Court rules non-unanimous jury verdicts unconstitutional

The Supreme Court on Monday ruled that defendants in criminal trials can only be convicted by a unanimous jury, striking down a scheme that has been rejected by every state except one. The court said in a divided opinion that the Constitution requires agreement among all members of a jury in order to impose a guilty verdict.

"Wherever we might look to determine what the term 'trial by an impartial jury trial' meant at the time of the Sixth Amendment's adoption—whether it's the common law, state practices in the founding era, or opinions and treatises written soon afterward—the answer is unmistakable," Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in an opinion. "A jury must reach a unanimous verdict in order to convict."

Oregon is the only state left in which defendants can be convicted over the dissent of up to two jurors. Louisiana recently abandoned the practice after more than a century of use.

The ruling overturns the 2016 conviction of a Louisiana man named Evangelisto Ramos. A jury by a 10-2 margin found him guilty of killing a woman in New Orleans. Two years after Ramos's conviction, Louisiana voters approved a constitutional amendment getting rid of non-unanimous jury verdicts. The new ruling likely means that Ramos could get a new trial.

From the Ramos v. Louisiana syllabus:

In 48 States and federal court, a single juror's vote to acquit is enough to prevent a conviction. But two States, Louisiana and Oregon, have long punished people based on 10-to-2 verdicts. In this case, petitioner Evangelisto Ramos was convicted of a serious crime in a Louisiana court by a 10-to-2 jury verdict. Instead of the mistrial he would have received almost anywhere else, Ramos was sentenced to life without parole. He contests his conviction by a nonunanimous jury as an unconstitutional denial of the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial.

Held: The judgment is reversed.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by J053 on Wednesday April 22 2020, @06:45PM (1 child)

    by J053 (3532) <dakineNO@SPAMshangri-la.cx> on Wednesday April 22 2020, @06:45PM (#985812) Homepage
    On the slight chance that this is a serious question, he’s a loon who was one of the reasons I abandoned the green site - it got to where he was repeating his screeds in every thread. As far as I can determine, he once wrote some kind of host file generator for Windows that was guaranteed to be better than any adblocker, then spent years attacking anyone who disagreed with him. Meh.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by Freeman on Wednesday April 22 2020, @06:56PM

    by Freeman (732) on Wednesday April 22 2020, @06:56PM (#985820) Journal

    Ahh..., so they're new here, which makes sense now. Here's hoping, they decide they can troll elsewhere . . .

    --
    Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"