Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments -- The Lost Role of the Peremptory Challenge in Securing an Accused's Right to an Impartial Jury

• NCJ Number: 116483
• Journal: Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Volume: 79 Issue: 3 Dated: (Fall 1988) Pages: 899-920
• Author(s): J G Bonebrake
• Date Published: 1988
• Length: 21 pages
• Publication Format: Article
• Publication Type: Legislation/Policy Analysis
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

This article discusses a recent Supreme Court conclusion that a defendant's sixth amendment right was not violated when he lost a peremptory challenge caused by trial court error because no proof of partiality existed as to the jurors who actually sat at the trial.

Abstract

The facts and procedural history of the case, Ross v. Oklahoma, are discussed in detail, along with the Court's statement that only State courts are able to determine the number, purpose, and manner of exercise of peremptory challenges. Therefore, a State scheme that implemented peremptory challenges could not be struck down as a violation of the defendant's sixth amendment rights. The article argues that the Supreme Court errs in failing to consider the possible negative effect that a State scheme for peremptory challenges could have on a defendant's right to an impartial jury: Federal review of State peremptory schemes should be permitted. 147 footnotes.