Jury Trial Selection and Management in California

CCP Part 1, Title 3, Chapter 1 concerns trial juries. Section 190 titles Chapter 1 as the Trial Jury Selection and Management Act. Section 191 states that the Legislature recognizes that trial by jury is a cherished constitutional right, and that jury service is an obligation of citizenship.

Section 192 states that this chapter applies to the selection of jurors, and the formation of trial juries, for both civil and criminal cases, in all trial courts of the state. Section 193 explains that juries are of three kinds in this state (grand, trial, and inquest).

Section 194 defines the following terms: “county,” “court,” “deferred jurors,” “excused jurors,” “juror pool,” “jury of inquest,” “master list,” “potential juror,” “prospective juror,” “qualified juror,” “qualified juror list,” “random,” “source list,” “summons list,” “trial jurors,” “trial jury,” and “trial jury panel.”

Section 195 requires in each county for there to be one jury commissioner who is appointed by, and serves at the pleasure of, a majority of the judges of the superior court. In any county where there is a superior court administrator or executive officer, that person serves as ex officio jury commissioner. The jury commissioner is primarily responsible for managing the jury system under the general supervision of the court in conformance with the purpose and scope of this act.

Section 196 requires the jury commissioner or the court to inquire as to the qualifications of persons on the master list or source list who are or may be summoned for jury service. The commissioner or the court may require any person to answer, under oath, orally or in written form, all questions as may be addressed to that person, regarding the person’s qualifications and ability to serve as a prospective trial juror. 

In addition, any person who fails to respond to jury commissioner or court inquiry as instructed may be summoned to appear before the jury commissioner or the court to answer the inquiry, or may be deemed to be qualified for jury service in the absence of a response to the inquiry.

Section 197 requires all persons selected for jury service to be selected at random, from a source or sources inclusive of a representative cross section of the population of the area served by the court. Sources may include customer mailing lists, telephone directories, or utility company lists. The list of registered voters and the Department of Motor Vehicles’ list of licensed drivers and identification cardholders resident within the area served by the court are appropriate source lists for selection of jurors.

In addition, the list of resident state tax filers is an appropriate source list for selection of jurors. The Department of Motor Vehicles is required to furnish the jury commissioner of each county with the current list of the names, addresses, and other identifying information of persons residing in the county who are age 18 years or older and who are holders of a current driver’s license holder. The Franchise Tax Board must annually furnish the jury commissioner of each county with a list of resident state tax filers for their county.

Section 198 requires random selection to be utilized in creating master and qualified juror lists, commencing with selection from source lists, and continuing through selection of prospective jurors for voir dire. The jury commissioner, at least once in each 12-month period, must randomly select names of prospective trial jurors from the source list or lists, to create a master list.

Section 198.5 provides that, if sessions of the superior court are held in a location other than the county seat, the names for master jury lists and qualified jury lists to serve in a session may be selected from the area in which the session is held.

Section 201 specifies that in any superior court, a separate trial jury panel may be drawn, summoned, and impaneled for each judge for use in the trial of cases before any of the judges. In those courts, when a panel of jurors is in attendance for service before one or more of the judges, the whole or any number of the jurors from such panel may be required to attend and serve in the trial of cases, or to complete a panel, or jury, before any other of the judges.

Section 202 states that mechanical, electric, or electronic equipment, which in the opinion of the jury commissioner is satisfactory, may be used in the performance of any function specified by this chapter for the selection and drawing of jurors.

Section 203 provides all persons are eligible and qualified to be prospective trial jurors, except for eleven categories of individuals. And, no person can be excluded from eligibility for jury service in the State of California, for any reason other than those reasons provided by this section.

Section 204 prohibits any eligible person from being exempted from service as a trial juror by reason of occupation, economic status, or any characteristic listed. An eligible person may be excused from jury service only for undue hardship, upon themselves or upon the public.

Section 205 requires the juror questionnaire to ask only questions related to juror identification, qualification, and ability to serve as a prospective juror. The court may require a prospective juror to complete additional questionnaires as may be deemed relevant and necessary for assisting in the voir dire process or to ascertain whether a fair cross section of the population is represented as required by law, if such procedures are established by local court rule.

Section 206 requires the judge in a criminal action, prior to discharging the jury from the case, to inform the jurors that they have an absolute right to discuss or not to discuss the deliberation or verdict with anyone. Following the discharge of the jury in a criminal case, the defendant, or his or her attorney or representative, or the prosecutor, or his or her representative, may discuss the jury deliberation or verdict with a member of the jury, provided that the juror consents to the discussion and that the discussion takes place at a reasonable time and place.

Any unreasonable contact with a juror by the defendant, or his or her attorney or representative, or by the prosecutor, or his or her representative, without the juror’s consent must be immediately reported to the trial judge. Any violation of this section are considered a violation of a lawful court order and are subject to reasonable monetary sanctions.

In addition, a defendant or defendant’s counsel may, following the recording of a jury’s verdict in a criminal proceeding, petition the court for access to personal juror identifying information within the court’s records necessary for the defendant to communicate with jurors for the purpose of developing a motion for new trial or any other lawful purpose. This information consists of jurors’ specified information.

Section 207 requires the jury commissioner to maintain records regarding selection, qualification, and assignment of prospective jurors, as well as records providing a clear audit trail regarding a juror’s attendance, jury fees, and mileage.

Section 208 requires the jury commissioner to estimate the number of prospective jurors that may be required to serve the needs of the court, and summon prospective jurors for service. The summons, when served by mail, must be mailed at least 10 days prior to the date of required appearance.

Section 209 provides that any prospective trial juror who has been summoned for service, and who fails to attend as directed or to respond to the court or jury commissioner and to be excused from attendance, may be attached and compelled to attend. In lieu of imposing sanctions for contempt, the court may impose reasonable monetary sanctions on a prospective juror who has not been excused. The court may give notice of its intent to impose sanctions by either of two specified means. The amount of monetary sanctions are specified.

Section 210 requires the summons to contain the date, time, and place of appearance required of the prospective juror or instructions as to the procedure for calling the jury commissioner for telephonic instructions for appearance as well as such additional juror information as deemed appropriate by the jury commissioner.

Section 211 provides, when a court has no prospective jurors remaining available for voir dire from panels furnished by the jury commissioner, and finds that not proceeding with voir dire will place a party’s right to a trial by jury in jeopardy, the court may direct the sheriff or marshal to summon, serve, and immediately attach the person of a sufficient number of citizens having the qualifications of jurors, to complete the panel.

Section 213 requires all or any portion of the summoned prospective jurors to be available on one-hour notice by telephone to appear for service, when the jury commissioner determines that it will efficiently serve the operational requirements of the court. Jurors available on one-hour telephone notice must receive credit for each day of availability towards their jury service obligation.

Section 214 requires the jury commissioner to provide orientation for new jurors, which includes necessary basic information concerning jury service.

Section 215 places the fee for jurors in the superior court, in civil and criminal cases, at $15 day for each day’s attendance as a juror after the first day. All jurors in the superior court, in civil and criminal cases, are to be reimbursed for mileage at the rate of thirty-four cents ($0.34) per mile for each mile actually traveled in attending and returning from court as a juror after the first day. And, all jurors and prospective jurors who have been summoned are provided with access to existing public transit services at no cost utilizing one of the specified options.

Section 216 requires the court to provide a deliberation room or rooms for use of jurors when they have retired for deliberation. The deliberation rooms are designed to minimize unwarranted intrusions by other persons in the court facility, have suitable furnishings, equipment, and supplies, and have restroom accommodations for male and female jurors.

Section 217 says, in criminal cases only, while the jury is kept together, the court may direct the sheriff or marshal to provide the jury with suitable and sufficient food and lodging, or other reasonable necessities.

Section 218 requires the jury commissioner to hear the excuses of jurors summoned, in accordance with the standards prescribed by the Judicial Council. It is left to the discretion of the jury commissioner to accept an excuse without a personal appearance. All excuses are to be in writing setting forth the basis of the request and be signed by the juror.

Section 219 requires the jury commissioner to randomly select jurors for jury panels to be sent to courtrooms for voir dire. However, no peace officer is allowed to be selected for voir dire in civil or criminal matters.

Section 220 requires a trial jury consist of 12 persons, except that in civil actions and cases of misdemeanor, it may consist of 12 or any number less than 12, upon which the parties may agree.

Section 222 says that, when an action is called for trial by jury, the clerk is required to randomly select the names of the jurors for voir dire, until the jury is selected or the panel is exhausted. When the jury commissioner has provided the court with a listing of the trial jury panel in random order, the court is required to seat prospective jurors for voir dire in the order provided by the panel list.

Section 222.5 requires the trial judge to conduct an initial examination of prospective jurors. At the final status conference or at the first practical opportunity prior to voir dire, whichever comes first, the trial judge is required to consider and discuss with counsel the form and subject matter of voir dire questions. Before voir dire by the trial judge, the parties may submit questions to the trial judge. The trial judge may include additional questions requested by the parties as the trial judge deems proper.

Upon completion of the trial judge’s initial examination, counsel for each party then has the right to examine, by oral and direct questioning, any of the prospective jurors in order to enable counsel to intelligently exercise both peremptory challenges and challenges for cause. The scope of the examination conducted by counsel must be within reasonable limits prescribed by the trial judge in the judge’s sound discretion subject to the provisions of this chapter.

During any examination conducted by counsel for the parties, the trial judge is required to permit liberal and probing examination calculated to discover bias or prejudice with regard to the circumstances of the particular case before the court. The fact that a topic has been included in the trial judge’s examination does not preclude appropriate followup questioning in the same area by counsel. 

In addition, the trial judge is prohibited from imposing specific unreasonable or arbitrary time limits or establish an inflexible time limit policy for voir dire. The term “improper question” is defined. In exercising the judge’s sound discretion, the trial judge is required to give due consideration to six specified factors. And, as voir dire proceeds, the judge is required to permit supplemental time for questioning based on any of three specified factors.

Upon the request of a party, the trial judge must allow a brief opening statement by counsel for each party prior to the commencement of the oral questioning phase of the voir dire process. In civil cases, the trial judge may, upon stipulation by counsel for all the parties appearing in the action, permit counsel to examine the prospective jurors outside a judge’s presence.

Section 224 provides, if a party does not cause the removal by challenge of an individual juror who is deaf, hard of hearing, blind, visually impaired, or speech impaired and who requires auxiliary services to facilitate communication, the party must stipulate to the presence of a service provider in the jury room during jury deliberations, and prepare and deliver to the court proposed jury instructions to the service provider. The term “service provider” is defined. And, the court has to appoint a service provider whose services are needed by a juror with a disability to facilitate communication or participation.

Section 225 states that a challenge is an objection made to the trial jurors that may be taken by any party to the action, and is of the ten specified classes and types in this section.

Section 226 provides a challenge to an individual juror may only be made before the jury is sworn. A challenge to an individual juror may be taken orally or may be made in writing, but no reason need be given for a peremptory challenge, and the court must exclude any juror challenged peremptorily.

In addition, all challenges for cause are to be exercised before any peremptory challenges may be exercised. All challenges to an individual juror, except a peremptory challenge, are to be taken, first by the defendants, and then by the people or plaintiffs.

Section 227 states the challenges of either party for cause need not all be taken at once, but they may be taken separately, in the specified order of four, including in each challenge all the causes of challenge belonging to the same class and type.

Section 228 allows challenges for general disqualification to be taken on one or both of the specified grounds.

Section 229 allows a challenge for implied bias to be taken for one or more of the eight specified causes, but no others.

Section 230 requires challenges to be tried by the court. The juror challenged and any other person may be examined as a witness in the trial of the challenge, and must truthfully answer all questions propounded to them.

Section 231 provides in criminal cases, if the offense charged is punishable with death, or with imprisonment in the state prison for life, the defendant is entitled to 20 and the people to 20 peremptory challenges. In a trial for any other offense, the defendant is entitled to 10 and the state to 10 peremptory challenges.

In civil cases, each party is entitled to 6 peremptory challenges. Peremptory challenges are to be taken or passed by the sides alternately, commencing with the plaintiff or people, and each party is entitled to have the panel full before exercising any peremptory challenge. When each side passes consecutively, the jury is then sworn, unless the court, for good cause, otherwise orders.

Section 231.5 prohibits a party from using a peremptory challenge to remove a prospective juror on the basis of an assumption that the prospective juror is biased merely because of a characteristic listed or similar ground.

Section 231.7 prohibits a part from using a peremptory challenge to remove a prospective juror on the basis of the prospective juror’s race, ethnicity, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, national origin, or religious affiliation, or the perceived membership of the prospective juror in any of those groups. A party, or the trial court on its own motion, may object to the improper use of a peremptory challenge. The objection must be made before the jury is impaneled, unless information becomes known that could not have reasonably been known before the jury was impaneled.

In addition, the court is required to evaluate the reasons given to justify the peremptory challenge in light of the totality of the circumstances. The court considers only the reasons actually given and does not speculate on, or assume the existence of, other possible justifications for the use of the peremptory challenge. The terms “substantial likelihood,” “unconscious bias,” and “clear and convincing” are defined. In making its determination, the circumstances the court may consider include those specified in this section.

The three specified reasons for peremptory challenges have historically been associated with improper discrimination in jury selection. Upon a court granting an objection to the improper exercise of a peremptory challenge, the court is required to do one or more of the five specified acts.

The denial of an objection made under this section is to be reviewed by the appellate court de novo, with the trial court’s express factual findings reviewed for substantial evidence. The reviewing court considers only reasons actually given and does not speculate as to or consider reasons that were not given to explain either the party’s use of the peremptory challenge. Should the appellate court determine that the objection was erroneously denied, that error is deemed prejudicial, the judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded for a new trial.

Section 232 states that, prior to the examination of prospective trial jurors in the panel assigned for voir dire, there are specified a perjury acknowledgement and an agreement which must be obtained from the panel, which are then acknowledged by the prospective jurors with the statement “I do”:

Section 233 provides if, before the jury has returned its verdict to the court, a juror becomes sick or, upon other good cause shown to the court, is found to be unable to perform his or her duty, the court may order the juror to be discharged. If any alternate jurors have been selected, one of them is designated by the court to take the place of the juror discharged. 

Section 234 states, when in the opinion of a judge of a superior court about to try a civil or criminal action or proceeding, the trial is likely to be a protracted one, or upon stipulation of the parties, the court may cause an entry to that effect to be made in the minutes of the court and the court may direct the calling of one or more additional jurors, in its discretion, to be known as “alternate jurors.”

The alternate jurors are seated so as to have equal power and facilities for seeing and hearing the proceedings in the case, and they take the same oath as the jurors already selected, and they must, unless excused by the court, attend at all times upon the trial of the cause in company with the other jurors, but they do not participate in deliberation unless ordered by the court, and for a failure to do so are liable to be punished for contempt.

If at any time, whether before or after the final submission of the case to the jury, a juror dies or becomes ill, or upon other good cause shown to the court is found to be unable to perform his or her duty, or if a juror requests a discharge and good cause appears therefor, the court may order the juror to be discharged and draw the name of an alternate, who then takes his or her place in the jury box, and is subject to the same rules and regulations as though he or she had been selected as one of the original jurors.

Section 235 requires the jury commissioner, at the request of the sheriff, coroner, or other ministerial officer, to provide prospective jurors as may be required to form a jury of inquest. Prospective jurors provided are to be selected, obligated, and compensated in the same manner as other jurors selected.

Section 236 requires, when six or more prospective jurors of inquest attend, for those jurors to be sworn by the coroner to inquire who the person was, and when, where, and by what means the person came to his or her death, to inquire into the circumstances attending the death, and to render a true verdict thereon, according to the evidence offered them or arising from the inspection of the body.

Section 237 states that the names of qualified jurors drawn from the qualified juror list for the superior court are to be made available to the public upon request, unless the court determines that a compelling interest requires that this information should be kept confidential or its use limited in whole or in part.

Upon the recording of a jury’s verdict in a criminal jury proceeding, the court’s record of personal juror identifying information of trial jurors consisting of names, addresses, and telephone numbers, is to be sealed until further order of the court as provided by this section. The terms “sealed” and “sealing” are defined. Any person may petition the court for access to these records.

After the hearing, the records must be made available as requested in the petition, unless a former juror’s protest to the granting of the petition is sustained. Any court employee who has legal access to personal juror identifying information sealed, who discloses the information, knowing it to be a violation of this section or a court order issued under this section, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

Section 241 requires the Judicial Council to sponsor a pilot program for two fiscal years to study whether increases in juror compensation and mileage reimbursement rates increase juror diversity and participation. The Judicial Council must select at least six trial courts, in counties with regional and geographic diversity, including the County of Alameda, to participate in the pilot program.

Section 242 states, following the receipt of a verdict and before discharging the jury in a criminal action or proceeding alleging a violent felony, the court is required to provide written information to the trial jurors about mental health awareness.