Also known as: jury deliberations · jury deliberating · deliberating jury · deliberations · jury room
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
The confidential discussions among jurors after the close of evidence in which they review testimony and exhibits, apply the court's instructions on the law, and work toward a verdict.
June Jiang, a government paralegal, receives a subpoena seeking notes from a grand jury investigation into corporate fraud at Jiang Textiles. She prepares to answer questions about witness statements and documents presented but refuses to reveal any comments made by grand jurors while they discussed the evidence or took votes. The court upholds her refusal because the rule protects the secrecy of those internal exchanges.
Javier Jimenez, a special prosecutor, subpoenas presidential records for use at trial. The President claims confidentiality over internal communications. The court orders production after weighing the need for evidence in a criminal case against generalized secrecy interests, allowing the jury to consider the materials during its private discussions.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Justin Jarvis sues Parklane Hosiery after a prior SEC judgment found the company liable for securities violations. The court permits the plaintiff to rely on the earlier findings. During deliberations the jury accepts those facts as established and focuses only on damages.
Jamal Jefferson and a codefendant stand trial together. The prosecution introduces the codefendant's confession that implicates Jefferson. The court instructs the jury to consider the statement only against the codefendant. In deliberations the jurors must separate the evidence to avoid using it against Jefferson.
Jillian James is convicted after her lawyer fails to investigate mitigating evidence. On collateral attack the court examines whether that omission prejudiced the outcome. The record shows the jury never received the additional facts that could have altered its sentencing discussion.
Jonathan Jaffe is sentenced to death. Post-trial evidence shows one juror relied on racial stereotypes during the penalty-phase discussions. The court admits the evidence to decide whether the verdict violated the right to an impartial jury.
No. Rule 606(b) bars juror testimony about statements, incidents, votes, or mental processes that occurred during deliberations when the validity of the verdict is challenged. The rule protects the secrecy and finality of the process.
Supporting sources
The court must instruct the jury to begin deliberations anew. This ensures the replacement participates fully from the start of the discussion process.
Supporting sources
Yes, when a juror makes a clear statement showing reliance on racial stereotypes or animus that significantly motivated the vote to convict. The trial court exercises discretion to determine whether the threshold is met.
Supporting sources
Yes. When multiple defendants are tried together the jury may return a partial verdict at any time during deliberations as to any defendant on whom it has agreed.
Supporting sources
…over abortion." Ante , at 878. Decisional autonomy must limit the State's power to inject into a woman's most personal deliberations its own views of what is best. The State may promote its preferences by funding childbirth, by creating and maintaining alternatives to abortion, and by espousing the virtues of family; but…