DOJ-OGR-00009729.jpg
683 KB
Extraction Summary
10
People
3
Organizations
0
Locations
4
Events
3
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
683 KB
Summary
This document is a page from a legal filing that defines and discusses the concept of "implied bias" in the context of jury selection. It cites several legal precedents (Torres, Haynes, Sampson, etc.) to explain that implied bias is presumed by law and is determined by the juror's circumstances, not their stated ability to be impartial. The text highlights that bias can be implied when a juror's personal experiences are similar to the issues being litigated, providing examples from cases involving murder and burglary.
People (10)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Torres | Litigant |
Cited in the legal case Torres, 128 F.3d at 43 and 45.
|
| Sampson | Litigant |
Cited in the legal case Sampson, 820 F. Supp. 2d at 162–67 and quoted in Daugerdas.
|
| Wood | Litigant |
Cited in the legal case Wood, 299 U.S. at 133, which is quoted in Torres.
|
| Haynes | Litigant |
Cited and quoted in the legal case Haynes, 398 F.2d at 984.
|
| Daugerdas | Litigant |
Cited in the legal case Daugerdas, 867 F. Supp. 2d at 472.
|
| Skaggs | Litigant |
Cited as a party in the case Skaggs v. Otis Elevator Co., 164 F.3d 511.
|
| Hunley | Litigant |
Cited as a party in the case Hunley v. Godinez, 975 F.2d 316.
|
| Godinez | Litigant |
Cited as a party in the case Hunley v. Godinez, 975 F.2d 316.
|
| Burton | Litigant |
Cited as a party in the case Burton v. Johnson, 948 F.2d 1150.
|
| Johnson | Litigant |
Cited as a party in the case Burton v. Johnson, 948 F.2d 1150.
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Otis Elevator Co. | company |
Mentioned as a party in the legal case Skaggs v. Otis Elevator Co.
|
| 10th Cir. | government agency |
Referenced as the circuit court for the Skaggs v. Otis Elevator Co. and Burton v. Johnson cases.
|
| 7th Cir. | government agency |
Referenced as the circuit court for the Hunley v. Godinez case.
|
Timeline (4 events)
Key Quotes (3)
"Implied or presumed bias is ‘bias conclusively presumed as a matter of law.’"Source
— Wood, 299 U.S. at 133 (as quoted in Torres)
(Defining the legal concept of implied bias.)
DOJ-OGR-00009729.jpg
Quote #1
"his statements upon voir dire [about his ability to be impartial] are totally irrelevant."Source
— Haynes, 398 F.2d at 984
(Explaining that a juror's own assessment of their impartiality is not considered when determining implied bias.)
DOJ-OGR-00009729.jpg
Quote #2
"[c]ourts imply bias ‘when there are similarities between the personal experiences of the juror and the issues being litigated.’"Source
— Sampson, 820 F. Supp. 2d at 163-64 (as quoted in Daugerdas)
(Describing one of the two ways in which courts imply bias.)
DOJ-OGR-00009729.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,816 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 642 Filed 03/11/22 Page 37 of 66
Challenges for cause can be based on implied bias, inferable bias, or actual basis.
See Torres, 128 F.3d at 43; see also Sampson, 820 F. Supp. 2d at 162–67 (discussing at
length each type of bias).
See Torres, 128 F.3d at 43; see also Sampson, 820 F. Supp. 2d at 162–67 (discussing at
length each type of bias).
1. Implied bias
“Implied or presumed bias is ‘bias conclusively presumed as a matter of law.’”
Torres, 128 F.3d at 45 (quoting Wood, 299 U.S. at 133). “It is attributed to a prospective
juror regardless of actual partiality.” Id. “In contrast to the inquiry for actual bias, which
focuses on whether the record at voir dire supports a finding that the juror was in fact
partial, the issue for implied bias is whether an average person in the position of the juror
in controversy would be prejudiced.” Id. (citing Haynes, 398 F.2d at 984). “And in
determining whether a prospective juror is impliedly biased, ‘his statements upon voir
dire [about his ability to be impartial] are totally irrelevant.” Id. (quoting Haynes, 398
F.2d at 984).
Torres, 128 F.3d at 45 (quoting Wood, 299 U.S. at 133). “It is attributed to a prospective
juror regardless of actual partiality.” Id. “In contrast to the inquiry for actual bias, which
focuses on whether the record at voir dire supports a finding that the juror was in fact
partial, the issue for implied bias is whether an average person in the position of the juror
in controversy would be prejudiced.” Id. (citing Haynes, 398 F.2d at 984). “And in
determining whether a prospective juror is impliedly biased, ‘his statements upon voir
dire [about his ability to be impartial] are totally irrelevant.” Id. (quoting Haynes, 398
F.2d at 984).
As is relevant here, there are two ways in which courts imply bias. First, “[c]ourts
imply bias ‘when there are similarities between the personal experiences of the juror and
the issues being litigated.’” Daugerdas, 867 F. Supp. 2d at 472 (quoting Sampson, 820 F.
Supp. 2d at 163-64); see also Skaggs v. Otis Elevator Co., 164 F.3d 511, 517 (10th Cir.
1998) (collecting cases where bias was implied based on the juror’s experiences); see,
e.g., Hunley v. Godinez, 975 F.2d 316, 319-20 (7th Cir. 1992) (holding, in a case
charging murder in the course of a burglary, that bias should be implied where two jurors
were the victims of similar burglaries during deliberations); Burton v. Johnson, 948 F.2d
1150, 1159 (10th Cir. 1991) (holding, in murder case in which the defendant presented a
imply bias ‘when there are similarities between the personal experiences of the juror and
the issues being litigated.’” Daugerdas, 867 F. Supp. 2d at 472 (quoting Sampson, 820 F.
Supp. 2d at 163-64); see also Skaggs v. Otis Elevator Co., 164 F.3d 511, 517 (10th Cir.
1998) (collecting cases where bias was implied based on the juror’s experiences); see,
e.g., Hunley v. Godinez, 975 F.2d 316, 319-20 (7th Cir. 1992) (holding, in a case
charging murder in the course of a burglary, that bias should be implied where two jurors
were the victims of similar burglaries during deliberations); Burton v. Johnson, 948 F.2d
1150, 1159 (10th Cir. 1991) (holding, in murder case in which the defendant presented a
30
DOJ-OGR-00009729
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document