Also known as: jury of peers · peers jury · trial by peers · impartial jury
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A constitutional right ensuring that a criminal defendant receives trial by an impartial jury selected from the community where the offense occurred. The guarantee protects against governmental oppression by requiring a body drawn from the local population rather than one handpicked by officials.
Jose Jimenez faced federal drug charges in a distant district after his arrest in his home state. His attorney moved for transfer, arguing that the selected jurors had no connection to the community where the alleged crimes occurred. The court granted the motion to ensure the jury reflected the peers from the proper district.
Jennifer Jackson, a Black defendant, objected when the prosecutor used peremptory challenges to remove all Black prospective jurors from the panel. The trial court found a pattern suggesting purposeful discrimination and seated a jury that included members of the defendant's racial community.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Jada Jones signed a waiver form without counsel present and proceeded to a bench trial on theft charges. On appeal she argued the waiver was invalid because she had not understood her right to a jury drawn from her community. The court vacated the conviction and ordered a new trial before an impartial jury of peers.
James Johnson was convicted in state court after the judge limited the jury pool to registered voters from a narrow geographic area. He challenged the conviction on the ground that the selection process excluded a fair cross-section of his community. The reviewing court reversed, holding that the Sixth Amendment right applied to the states.
Joanna Jung, the defendant, sought to use peremptory challenges to exclude all white jurors from her criminal trial. The prosecution objected that the strikes violated equal protection. The court disallowed the challenges, ensuring the jury remained representative of the community at large.
Jorge Juarez, facing bigamy charges, argued that prospective jurors who held strong religious objections to plural marriage could not serve impartially. The trial court excused those jurors after individual questioning. The resulting panel reflected a cross-section of the local community without systematic exclusion based on faith.
The jury must be impartial and drawn from the state and district where the crime occurred. It must reflect a fair cross-section of the community to serve as a check on government power.
Supporting sources
Yes. The prohibition on discriminatory peremptory challenges applies to all parties to preserve an impartial jury drawn from the community.
Evidence that a juror relied on racial stereotypes or animus as a significant motivating factor in voting to convict may be admitted to determine whether the right to an impartial jury was violated.
Supporting sources
A defendant is entitled to a jury from the district where the crime was committed. Categorical bars on venue changes can violate the right when prejudice prevents an impartial local panel.
Supporting sources
…the Counsel Clause: "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the…