Jury Duty in the US Capitol District
Jun. 20th, 2006 04:15 pmFor those who have asked about why I'd even be allowed to serve jury duty as an attorney, first a quip, then a more serious explanation.
1. They already exclude felons, if they excluded lawyers, too, there would be no one left to serve.
2. The District of Columbia has a limited number of potential jurors and a large number of cases to be heard. Only citizens of the District may serve, so that cuts out all the transients and those n'er-do-wells who live here but refuse to register themselves as real residents of the District, preferring to keep their legal residence elsewhere even though they really live here. As I alluded to above, felons who are still within ten years of having finished their sentence are also not allowed to serve as jurors. That cuts down the number of potential jurors by a very, very large percentage. Attorneys are not categorically excluded, though they are frequently the target of the usual non-commented upon strikes by one or both of the attorneys on either side during voir dire. I have heard of attorneys serving on petit juries, and as we know, I've served on two different grand juries in my 7 years in the District.
So, no, there's no categorical exemption (though I'd love it if we had Oklahoma's law, which excludes "attorneys, habitual drunkards and insane persons."), so unless i get striken, I have to serve. Luckily, today I was not called in for a panel, and it was a slow day, so they released those who had not been chosen for a panel at 2.
1. They already exclude felons, if they excluded lawyers, too, there would be no one left to serve.
2. The District of Columbia has a limited number of potential jurors and a large number of cases to be heard. Only citizens of the District may serve, so that cuts out all the transients and those n'er-do-wells who live here but refuse to register themselves as real residents of the District, preferring to keep their legal residence elsewhere even though they really live here. As I alluded to above, felons who are still within ten years of having finished their sentence are also not allowed to serve as jurors. That cuts down the number of potential jurors by a very, very large percentage. Attorneys are not categorically excluded, though they are frequently the target of the usual non-commented upon strikes by one or both of the attorneys on either side during voir dire. I have heard of attorneys serving on petit juries, and as we know, I've served on two different grand juries in my 7 years in the District.
So, no, there's no categorical exemption (though I'd love it if we had Oklahoma's law, which excludes "attorneys, habitual drunkards and insane persons."), so unless i get striken, I have to serve. Luckily, today I was not called in for a panel, and it was a slow day, so they released those who had not been chosen for a panel at 2.
no subject
Date: 2006-06-20 08:23 pm (UTC)j/k :)
no subject
Date: 2006-06-20 08:28 pm (UTC)Rather redundant, non?
The trouble with having a non code-based legislative book (http://www.qp.gov.bc.ca/statreg/stat/J/96242_01.htm#section3) is that good stuff like that gets noticed and excised.
no subject
Date: 2006-06-20 08:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-06-20 08:47 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-06-20 09:21 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-06-20 10:08 pm (UTC)-C
no subject
Date: 2006-06-21 02:33 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-06-21 03:55 am (UTC)