1190:, Randy Jonakait, and Renee Lettow Lerner see the jury as an important constitutional entity that checks the other branches of government. Suja A. Thomas argues that juries were intended by the founders as a co-equal check on the other branches of government such as the executive branch (prosecutors), the judicial branch (judges), the legislature and states, but that these other branches of government had taken almost all of the jury's power by the 21st century, even as juries became used more widely around the world. She further argues that juries are more impartial than judges and other decision-makers because they are free from political or status incentives to rule a certain way. Robert Burns further argues that the public nature of jury trials can start important political conversations by surfacing and making public information that otherwise would stay hidden. He cites cases around asbestos, tobacco, and lead as examples. He argues that companies and the chamber of commerce have worked to take away jury power, especially after the
87:
480:, which provides: "In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law." Although the civil jury (unlike the criminal jury) has fallen into disuse in much of the rest of the world, including England, it remains in high esteem in the United States. In
1101:, and that judges are also capable of differing from other judges in the sentences they impose. Judges may even deviate from their own usual sentencing practices if the case is high-profile or a judicial election is coming up. Also, disparities are not always a sign of arbitrariness; sometimes they may reflect geographical differences in public attitudes toward a given crime, or a jury's taking proper account of the individual circumstances of each offender.
174:
women's suffrage movement, permeating the media with arguments for and against it. Federal and state court case rulings increased women's participation on juries. Some states allowed women to serve on juries much earlier than others. States also differed on whether women's suffrage implied women's jury service. Robert Burns argues that the decline of the jury trial has been and would be a setback for hard-earned enfranchisement of women and minorities.
619:
1117:
engaging ordinary citizens in government through this process of deliberative democracy will give these citizens confidence about their ability to influence political decisions and thus increase their willingness to participate in politics even after the end of their jury service. Racial and other minorities may also benefit from having greater representation among jurors than among judges.
1026:, but the penalty for second-degree murder was any term between five and eighteen years in the penitentiary. The 1796 act gave the court in murder cases the authority to "determine the degree of the crime, and to give sentence accordingly" when a defendant was "convicted by confession." The judge's discretion to set sentences in cases of confession did not exist in Kentucky.
1093:
the civil system has juries decide judgments. A counter-argument is that studies show, at least in second-degree murder cases where juries are allowed to recommend mercy, that more punitive sentences increase perceptions of legitimacy, and that judges' declining to follow juries' recommendations does not decrease public confidence and perceptions of fairness and legitimacy.
488:, he wrote, "t is a most important and valuable amendment; and places upon the high ground of constitutional right the inestimable privilege of a trial by jury in civil cases, a privilege scarcely inferior to that in criminal cases, which is conceded by all to be essential to political and civil liberty." Nearly every state constitution contains a similar guarantee.
99:
including by indicting
British soldiers, refusing to indict people who criticized the crown, proposing boycotts and called for the support of the war after the Declaration of Independence. In the late 18th century, colonial civil, criminal and grand juries played significant roles in checking the power of the executive, the legislature and the judiciary.
1064:
Alabama, judges were allowed to override juries' recommendations of life imprisonment and impose capital punishment instead, until a 2017 law took that power away. All jury sentencing states except Texas allow the judge to fix the punishment in case the jury fails to agree on a sentence, making it impossible for there to be a mistrial due to a
825:, judges determined sentences. The change to jury determination of the penalty was brought about by one of the first laws passed by the first legislature of the State of Texas in 1846, which empowered the jury to sentence the defendant in all criminal cases except capital cases and cases for which punishment was fixed by law.
2458:
62 OKLA.STAT.ANN. tit. 22, § 926.1 (West 2010) ("In all cases of a verdict of conviction for any offense against any of the laws of the State of
Oklahoma, the jury may, and shall upon the request of the defendant assess and declare the punishment in their verdict within the limitations fixed by law .
1143:
current, and obtain better and more efficient administration of justice. Research from 1995 indicates that while civil trials may proceed more slowly before a jury, judge-tried cases last longer on the docket. However, proposals to abolish the jury system have been criticized on the grounds that only
1112:
rather than by experts such as judges, since they involve deeply contested moral and political issues rather than scientific or technical issues. She argues that since sentencing requires individualized, case-by-case assessments, sentences should be decided through small-scale deliberation by juries,
271:
in 1968. Most states' constitutions also grant the right of trial by jury in lesser criminal matters, though most have eliminated that right in offenses punishable by fine only. The
Supreme Court has ruled that if imprisonment is for six months or less, trial by jury is not required, meaning a state
173:
The representation of women in United States juries has increased during the last hundred years due to legislation and court rulings. Until the late twentieth century, women were routinely excluded or allowed to opt out of jury service. The push for women's jury rights generated debate similar to the
896:
The process of preparing a presentence report, which takes weeks, only begins after the defendant is convicted, since if they were to be acquitted, the effort that went into preparing the report would be wasted. It would, therefore, not be possible for juries to sentence the defendant at the time of
760:
that implemented sentencing by jury in 1798. While in
Virginia, magistrates continued to have misdemeanor sentencing power (possibly because of the political influence of magistrates who served in the General Assembly), in Kentucky, this power was given to juries. Kentucky juries tried and sentenced
491:
The 7th
Amendment does not create any right to a jury trial; rather, it "preserves" the right to jury trial that existed in 1791 at common law. In this context, common law means the legal environment the United States inherited from England at the time. In England in 1791, civil actions were divided
1104:
It is sometimes argued that an unreasonable juror may force the rest of the jury into an undesirable compromise to find the defendant guilty but impose an overly light sentence. A counter-argument is that whether this is bad or good is a matter of perception since "one juror's principled holdout is
1092:
is that criminal and civil juries have similar societal functions, including checking the abuse of governmental power, injecting community values into legal decisions, and aiding public acceptance of legal determinations; and therefore the criminal system should have juries decide sentences much as
1063:
States with jury sentencing have often allowed judges to intervene in the sentencing process, e.g. by reducing the sentence imposed by the jury, imposing hard labor or solitary confinement in addition to the jury's assessment of fines, or determining the place of confinement imposed by the jury. In
925:
model with its focus on using mathematical models and grids to determine sentences, had made inroads, making jury sentencing seem like more of an anachronism. Georgia permanently abandoned jury sentencing in 1974 and
Tennessee did the same in 1982. By the 1980s, Alabama, Illinois, Indiana, Montana,
554:
39(c) allows a court to use one at its discretion. To determine whether the action would have been legal or equitable in 1791, one must first look at the type of action and whether such an action was considered "legal" or "equitable" in 1791. Next, the relief being sought must be examined. Monetary
247:
A petit jury, also known as a trial jury, is the standard type of jury used in criminal cases in the United States. Petit juries are responsible for deciding whether or not a defendant is guilty of violating the law in a specific case. They consist of 12 people, and their deliberations are private.
2474:
n other cases where the defendant so elects in writing before the commencement of the voir dire examination of the jury panel, the punishment shall be assessed by the same jury . . . . If a finding of guilty is returned, the defendant may, with the consent of the attorney for the state, change his
1051:
or to information about whether sentences will run consecutively or concurrently, and until 2000 were also not informed that parole had been abolished in
Virginia. A judge must justify any departure from the jury's recommendation in writing to the Virginia Criminal Sentencing Commission. Less than
636:
through voter registration and drivers' license lists. A form is sent to prospective jurors to pre-qualify them by asking the recipient to answer questions about citizenship, disabilities, ability to understand the
English language, and whether they have any conditions that would excuse them from
609:
are becoming increasingly common in the marketplace, to the point at which it is becoming difficult for consumers to purchase products without waiving their right to settle disputes arising out of the transaction by jury trial. It has been argued that arbitration clauses should be held to a higher
309:
education course. The
Supreme Court found that the disadvantages of such a sentence, "onerous though they may be, may be outweighed by the benefits that result from speedy and inexpensive nonjury adjudications." Such interpretations have been criticized on the grounds that "all" is not a word that
1116:
An advantage
Iontcheva cites of having juries come together to deliberate on sentences is that the jurors may alter their preferences in the light of new perspectives. She argues that the hearing and consideration of diverse opinions will give the sentencing decisions greater legitimacy, and that
817:
The adoption of jury sentencing happened at the same time that the movement for an elective judiciary gathered speed, with at least four states, Alabama, Mississippi, Montana, and North Dakota switching to judicial elections around the same time that they adopted jury sentencing. Both reforms may
452:
23(a), only if the prosecution and the court consent may a defendant have a waiver of jury trial. However, most states give the defendant the absolute right to waive a jury trial. In those states, the right to a jury trial belongs exclusively to the criminal defendant, and the prosecution cannot
295:
objected to setting this limitation at six months for the States, preferring to give them greater leeway. No jury trial was required when the trial judge suspended sentence and placed defendant on probation for three years. There is a presumption that offenses carrying maximum imprisonment of six
98:
In some American colonies (such as in New England and Virginia) and less often in England, juries also handed down rulings on the law in addition to rulings on the facts of the case. The American grand jury was also indispensable to the American Revolution by challenging the Crown and Parliament,
900:
Furthermore, jury control procedures typically provide that during the trial, information about the defendant's background that is not relevant to the issue of guilt is not to be presented in the presence of the jury, lest it prejudice them. The assumptions that presentence reports would be more
157:
Those who wrote our constitutions knew from history and experience that it was necessary to protect against unfounded criminal charges brought to eliminate enemies and against judges too responsive to the voice of higher authority. The framers of the constitutions strove to create an independent
1096:
Arguments that have been raised against sentencing by jury are that juries are not as accountable as judges; that putting them in charge of determining both guilt and the sentence concentrates too much power in one body; and that different juries may differ widely in the sentences they impose.
585:
Following the English tradition, U.S. juries have usually been composed of 12 jurors, and the jury's verdict has usually been required to be unanimous. However, in many jurisdictions, the number of jurors is often reduced to a lesser number (such as five or six) by legislative enactment, or by
939:
have had difficulty mustering the political will to make clear choices among opposing moral and ideological viewpoints, instead delegating these decisions to agencies that lack the representativeness and democratic origin of legislatures. Prosecutors have routinely circumvented the sentencing
379:
held that a criminal defendant has a right to a jury trial not only on the question of guilt or innocence, but any fact used to increase the defendant's sentence beyond the maximum otherwise allowed by statutes or sentencing guidelines. This invalidated the procedure in many states and the
549:
Rule 2 says "here is one form of action - the civil action" which abolishes the legal/equity distinction. Today, in actions that would have been "at law" in 1791, there is a right to a jury; in actions that would have been "in equity" in 1791, there is no right to a jury. However,
1120:
In jurisdictions that do not have any statutory provisions formally allowing jury sentencing, judges have sometimes consulted with the jury on sentencing anyway. At the federal level, the practice of polling the jury and using their input in sentencing was upheld on appeal by the
1014:) also raise a question of whether the Supreme Court logically should allow only a jury, rather than a judge, to determine a juvenile should receive such a sentence, given the parallels between adult capital punishment case law and juvenile life imprisonment with parole case law.
158:
judiciary but insisted upon further protection against arbitrary action. Providing an accused with the right trial by a jury of his peers gave him an inestimable safeguard against the corrupt or overzealous prosecutor and against the compliant, biased, or eccentric judge.
457:, one of the jurors became incapacitated and counsel for the defendant and the government agreed to continue with 11 jurors. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that this was acceptable if the prosecution and the court, as well as the defendant, agreed to this procedure.
888:
gathered and analyzed information about the defendant's character and prepared a presentence report that served as the basis for the ultimate sentence. Probation provided opportunities for treatment in the community for juveniles and adults. In the prison system,
304:
category if the legislature tacks on onerous penalties not involving incarceration. No jury trial is required, however, when the maximum sentence is six months in jail, a fine not to exceed $ 1,000, a 90-day driver's license suspension, and attendance at an
63:(also known as a trial jury), which listen to the evidence presented during the course of a criminal trial and are charged with determining the guilt or innocence of the accused party; and civil juries, which are charged with evaluating civil lawsuits.
1034:
statute, which generally increases the information available to sentencing juries, does not provide for sentencing guidelines and statistics. Kentucky courts have also held parole eligibility statistics inadmissible. The military at one time provided
897:
conviction, if the jury needed to rely on a presentence report in making its sentencing decision; rather, the jury would need to be broken up and reassembled later, which could be unworkable if the delay between verdict and sentencing is substantial.
334:, which means if one is willing to pay the cost in case of a loss, one may even obtain a jury trial for a parking ticket in those states. In Virginia, one wanting a jury trial on a minor misdemeanor or traffic offense would actually have a right to
2429:
Upon return of a verdict of guilty . . . the court shall conduct a sentencing hearing before the jury, if such case was tried before a jury. In the hearing the jury will determine the punishment to be imposed within the range provided elsewhere by
313:
In the case of traffic offenses punishable by fine only (including parking tickets), and misdemeanor charges providing for imprisonment of six months or less, the availability of trial by jury varies from state to state, usually providing only for
797:
distrusted the Republican district court judges; while in Pennsylvania, the Constitutionalists sought (over the objections of Republicans) to put sentencing power in the hands of the judges because the bench was populated by Constitutionalists.
755:
Sentencing by jury was, however, successfully enacted in Virginia's 1796 penal code, which like the 1779 bill replaced capital punishment with terms of imprisonment for most felony offenses. Kentucky adopted a penal reform bill introduced by
1071:
In 2020, the Virginia Senate approved SB 810, giving juries applicable discretionary sentencing guidelines worksheets, and SB 811, providing that the court ascertain the punishment unless the defendant requests jury sentencing. Proponent
1039:
with sentencing statistics and guidelines was the military, but this practice ended in the late 1950s as the military's judicial philosophy shifted its emphasis away from sentencing uniformity and towards individualized judgments. The
581:
discussed the right to a jury, holding that when both equitable and legal claims are brought, the right to a jury trial still exists for the legal claim, which would be decided by a jury before the judge ruled on the equitable claim.
1769:
The U.S. Supreme Court outlawed split-jury verdicts for people accused of serious crimes in the landmark 2020 ruling Ramos v. Louisiana, righting a historical wrong propelled more than a century ago by white supremacy and xenophobic
901:
informative than presentence hearings, and that training and experience were required to intelligently consider the data and assess sanctions, militated in favor of having a judge rather than a jury do the sentencing. In the case of
861:
philosophy that it would be more useful for society to focus on finding ways to prevent future crime than on fixing blame for crime that had occurred in the past. Criminal behavior was viewed as the result of such factors as
2492:
he term of confinement in the state correctional facility or in jail and the amount of fine, if any, of a person convicted of a criminal offense,shall be ascertained by the jury, or by the court in cases tried without a
971:(requiring a jury, rather than a judge, to find whether there are aggravating factors justifying capital punishment) have also signaled a willingness by the judiciary to expand the role of the jury in the legal process.
788:
allowed judges to determine penalties, with Pennsylvania also allowing judges to pardon prisoners who, in their view, had evidenced sincere reformation. One hypothesis is that Virginia opted for jury sentencing because
234:
A grand jury decides whether or not there is enough evidence ("probable cause") that a person has committed a crime in order to put him or her on trial. If a grand jury decides there is enough evidence, the person is
934:
According to some commentators, the time is ripe for a revival of jury sentencing, because flaws in the determinate sentencing systems are becoming increasingly apparent. Lawmakers drafting legislation such as the
940:
guidelines through their charging and plea bargaining decisions, creating a new set of disparities, despite the intent of the guidelines to curtail disparities. Determinate sentencing has also failed to reduce
1029:
In Missouri, informing juries of sentences of defendants in similar cases or the sentences of co-participants in the crime on trial is strictly prohibited under the rules of evidence." Similarly, the Kentucky
256:
Currently in the United States every person accused of a crime punishable by incarceration for more than six months has a constitutional right to a trial by jury, which arises from the Sixth Amendment and
1052:
one-quarter of jury-recommended sentences are modified by judges. Due to concerns about juries' imposing higher sentences than what the sentencing guidelines would suggest, many defendants opt either for
392:
Unanimous jury verdicts is required in serious criminal cases, including convictions but not necessarily acquittals. A jury must be unanimous for either a guilty or not guilty decision. In the event of a
2613:
Any convict commencing a quarrel with another should "suffer such punishment (within the prison) as should be awarded by an impartial jury, but not over four lashes, or 10 hours of solitary confinement.
3556:
515:
The right to a jury trial in civil cases does not extend to the states, except when a state court is enforcing a federally created right, of which the right to trial by jury is a substantial part.
926:
and North Dakota had also abandoned jury sentencing, and Mississippi was using jury sentencing only in rape and statutory rape cases. Oklahoma abolished jury sentencing but reinstated it in 1999.
1813:
355:
systems do not recognize a right to a jury trial, on the grounds that juvenile proceedings are civil rather than criminal, and that jury trials would cause the process to become adversarial.
239:. A grand jury has 16-23 members, and its proceedings are not open to the public. Unlike a petit jury, defendants and their attorneys do not have the right to appear before the grand jury.
2974:
2905:
744:, abolished capital punishment for most offenses, and allowed juries to decide punishments when the penalty was discretionary. This bill failed, however, both in 1779 and 1786, after
1965:
NJ King; DA Soule; S Steen; RR Weidner (2005), "When Process Affects Punishment: Differences in Sentences After Guilty Plea, Bench Trial, and Jury Trial in Five Guidelines States",
275:
Specifically, the Supreme Court has held that no offense can be deemed 'petty' for purposes of the right to trial by jury where imprisonment for more than six months is authorized.
2226:
2203:
2033:
1994:
1730:
1707:
1650:
1625:
1602:
1577:
1383:
512:
The right to a jury trial is determined based upon the a demand in the complaint brought by a Plaintiff, without regard to the defenses or counterclaims asserted by a defendant.
2952:"Sentencing Roulette: How Virginia's Criminal Sentencing System is Imposing an Unconstitutional Trial Penalty That Suppresses the Rights of Criminal Defendants to a Jury Trial"
2447:
If the jury at the first stage of a trial finds the defendant guilty of the submitted offense . . . The jury shall assess and declare the punishment as authorized by statute.
1089:
477:
471:
133:
49:
1826:
On April 20, 2020, in a fractured opinion in Ramos v. Louisiana, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Constitution requires unanimous jury verdicts in state criminal trials.
649:
Jury sentencing is the practice of having juries decide what penalties to give those who have been convicted of criminal offenses. The practice of jury sentencing began in
1007:
590:
48 states that a federal civil jury must begin with at least 6 and no more than 12 members, and that the verdict must be unanimous unless the parties stipulate otherwise.
2920:
1085:
941:
121:
45:
41:
914:
Georgia and Tennessee both had periods (from 1937 to 1939 and from 1913 to 1923, respectively) in which they briefly abandoned jury sentencing while experimenting with
2890:
2808:
911:
and three other Justices opining that an adversarial system would put an end to the prospect of an intimate, informal protective proceeding focused on rehabilitation.
258:
33:
283:
concurred, stating that they would have required a jury trial in all criminal proceedings in which the sanction imposed bears the indicia of criminal punishment.
1006:(banning mandatory life imprisonment without parole, and life imprisonment without parole in non-homicide cases, respectively, for juveniles, as contrary to the
721:
and came to include various ranges and modes of imprisonment, creating more room for case-by-case decisionmaking to which juries were thought to be well-suited.
1883:
3180:
Thomas Jefferson described, 'trial by jury…as the only anchor ever yet imagined by man, which a government can be held to the principles of its constitution.'
1203:
344:
in Circuit court, this time with a jury if they chose to do so. Similarly, in Texas, fine-only misdemeanor offenses tried first in a court not of record (
846:. By 1910, the role of juries in determining penalties was being eroded by the professionalization of sentencing, as many states passed laws that created
66:
The power of the jury has declined substantially since the founding relative to other branches of government thanks to practices like judicial acquittal,
893:, trained in penology and insulated from political pressures, determined when prisoners had been rehabilitated and could be reintegrated into society.
757:
445:
is held. Research indicates there is not a consistent difference between penalties handed down in jury trials and those handed down in bench trials.
518:
It has been suggested that in complex litigation, the jury's inability to comprehend the issues may cause the 7th Amendment right to conflict with
3601:
3515:
1041:
28:
Laws and regulations governing jury selection and conviction/acquittal requirements vary from state to state (and are not available in courts of
1108:
According to University of Chicago Law School lecturer Jenia Iontcheva, sentencing decisions are well-suited to being made through a process of
959:. There have been movements to abolish sentencing commissions and guideline systems and inform jurors of their right to nullify. Decisions like
1178:
acknowledged the jury is not perfect, but argued its mistakes were easily corrected and it could never grow into a dangerous system. Scholars
842:
reflected growing concern that letting juries decide whether or how the law should be applied in particular cases could be detrimental to the
3307:
3279:
3251:
3226:
3201:
3173:
3148:
1414:
1362:
1334:
1309:
1284:
2872:
384:
that allowed sentencing enhancement based on "a preponderance of evidence", where enhancement could be based on the judge's findings alone.
3645:
1910:
117:
413:. Previously, Oregon had allowed non-unanimous decisions, and Louisiana had only recently abolished them for crimes committed after 2018.
3596:
1191:
1105:
another juror's irrational nullification. One jury's 'compromise' is another jury's perfectly appropriate give-and-take deliberations."
627:
538:, the Supreme Court held that a civil jury of six members did not violate the Seventh Amendment right to trial by jury in a civil case.
404:
262:
1938:
1645:
918:. By 1919, fourteen states gave juries sentencing powers in non-capital cases, although by 1960, that number had dropped to thirteen.
449:
376:
91:
75:
3008:
637:
being a juror. If they are deemed qualified, a summons is issued. In the federal system, jurors are selected in accordance with the
1122:
229:
56:
22:
3123:
3106:
2279:
2167:
2053:
1688:
586:
agreement of both sides. Some jurisdictions also permit a verdict to be returned despite the dissent of one, two, or three jurors.
3089:
2412:
2296:
2184:
2096:
1671:
546:
107:
103:
2262:
2128:
2079:
78:
is unconstitutional and undesirable. Robert Burns agrees, arguing that elites gain power when judges, not juries, decide cases.
3624:
3074:
2928:
587:
551:
526:
1751:
3354:
1175:
598:
2993:
2469:
338:
trials if they wanted a jury trial on the issue, first by bench trial only in District court, and then, if they lost, to a
3606:
2379:
If a defendant is charged with a felony and is found guilty of an offense by a jury, the jury shall fix punishment . . . .
602:
168:
1139:
In 1974, Edward Devitt proposed abolishing the federal civil jury system in order to clean up the backlog of cases, keep
3650:
1855:
1011:
381:
37:
3591:
3561:
2823:
1787:
1036:
653:
in the 18th century and spread westward to other states that were influenced by Virginia-trained lawyers. As of 2018,
573:
397:, charges against the defendant are not dropped and can be reinstated if the government so chooses. In April 2020, in
2313:
2693:
2650:"The changing purposes of criminal punishment: A retrospective on the past century and some thoughts about the next"
1782:
948:
965:(requiring a jury, rather than a judge, to find any facts that would increase a defendant's maximum sentence) and
713:
The impetus for introducing jury sentencing was that in the late 18th century, punishment options expanded beyond
3655:
3576:
3525:
3272:
The missing American jury: restoring the fundamental constitutional role of the criminal, civil, and grand juries
3244:
The missing American jury: restoring the fundamental constitutional role of the criminal, civil, and grand juries
3219:
The missing American jury: restoring the fundamental constitutional role of the criminal, civil, and grand juries
3194:
The missing American jury: restoring the fundamental constitutional role of the criminal, civil, and grand juries
3166:
The missing American jury: restoring the fundamental constitutional role of the criminal, civil, and grand juries
3141:
The missing American jury: restoring the fundamental constitutional role of the criminal, civil, and grand juries
1355:
The missing American jury: restoring the fundamental constitutional role of the criminal, civil, and grand juries
1327:
The missing American jury: restoring the fundamental constitutional role of the criminal, civil, and grand juries
1277:
The missing American jury: restoring the fundamental constitutional role of the criminal, civil, and grand juries
922:
733:
560:
3566:
3328:
3009:"The Right to a Jury Decision on Sentencing Facts after Booker: What the Seventh Amendment Can Teach the Sixth"
915:
725:
2824:"Applying Apprendi to jury sentencing: why state felony jury sentencing threatens the right to a jury trial"
986:
947:
Also, some juries have been acquitting guilty defendants to save them from what they regard as overly harsh
903:
828:
Indiana, Illinois, Arkansas, Oklahoma, and West Virginia adopted jury sentencing later in the 19th century.
288:
32:), but the fundamental right itself is mentioned five times in the Constitution: Once in the original text (
2487:
605:
has been used by some parties to prevent the 7th Amendment right to a civil jury trial from being invoked.
2368:
1109:
991:
961:
838:
365:
191:
1076:
said, "Juries are unpredictable . . . You have much more stability with the judge doing the sentencing."
761:
slaves and free blacks, and even decided cases involving prison discipline, imposing punishments such as
348:
courts or municipal courts without a court reporter) may be appealed to a trial de novo in county court.
2802:
2385:
2230:
2207:
2037:
1998:
1734:
1711:
1654:
1629:
1606:
1581:
1387:
1098:
1048:
980:
952:
936:
606:
503:, indicated that 7th Amendment right to jury trial may severely limit developments in the principles of
371:
3383:
882:
would determine the causes of crime and what social reforms and treatment programs would correct them.
132:, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed," and the
1044:
held that jurors were not to consider sentences in similar cases or to consult the sentencing manual.
3581:
3510:
3500:
1690:
With Liberty and Juvenile Justice for All: Extending the Right to a Jury Trial to the Juvenile Courts
1097:
Counterarguments are that the lack of accountability of jurors to a higher authority preserves their
1047:
Under Virginia's current system, jurors are controversially not allowed access to the Commonwealth's
766:
678:
564:
555:
damages alone were purely a legal remedy, and thus entitled to a jury. Non-monetary remedies such as
509:. Some critics believe that the United States has more trial by jury than is necessary or desirable.
345:
306:
284:
206:
consists of 12 members in criminal cases and 6 to 12 members in civil cases, and the verdict must be
2373:
1247:
1222:
907:, the U.S. Supreme Court held that alleged juvenile delinquents have no right to a jury trial, with
86:
3571:
1856:"Supreme Court says unanimous jury verdicts required in state criminal trials for serious offenses"
1597:
1572:
1544:
1378:
1031:
1023:
794:
267:
149:
2994:"Did judicial override end in Alabama? Some say judges can still overrule jury over death penalty"
769:
for infractions. Georgia and Tennessee adopted sentencing by jury in 1816 and 1829, respectively.
3505:
3477:
3462:
3440:
3347:
2884:
2771:
2732:
2669:
2587:
2442:
1974:
1792:
1171:
867:
811:
714:
638:
578:
568:
534:
399:
280:
199:
144:
2345:
2144:
2098:
Seventh Amendment Right to Jury Trial: A Study in the Irrationality of Rational Decision Making
921:
By the 1970s and 1980s, determinate sentencing, a new intellectual current that repudiated the
3420:
3388:
3303:
3275:
3247:
3222:
3197:
3169:
3144:
1943:
1420:
1410:
1358:
1330:
1305:
1280:
1002:
996:
956:
890:
885:
822:
741:
409:
202:
consists of 16 to 23 members and requires the concurrence of 12 in order to indict. A federal
124:, which states in part, "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a
3324:
3044:"Investigating the Impact of Jury Sentencing Recommendations Using Procedural Justice Theory"
1113:
as opposed to having lawmakers codify general policies for mechanical application by judges.
3520:
3472:
3425:
3055:
2763:
2724:
2661:
2579:
1163:
974:
Jury sentencing has been seen as a way to in many cases render moot the questions raised by
858:
790:
785:
749:
729:
67:
59:, charged with determining whether enough evidence exists to warrant a criminal indictment;
2790:
2281:
Mandatory Binding Arbitration and the Demise of the Seventh Amendment Right to a Jury Trial
248:
Their decision is known as a verdict and decides whether a person is guilty or not guilty.
3495:
2649:
2398:
2315:
Contractual Arbitration, Mandatory Arbitration, and State Constitutional Jury-Trial Rights
1179:
967:
71:
2751:
2606:
3020:
2057:
618:
3487:
3445:
2416:
2233:
2210:
2040:
1737:
1714:
1657:
1632:
1390:
1140:
908:
803:
799:
633:
448:
In United States Federal courts, there is no absolute right to waive a jury trial. Per
352:
292:
29:
2014:
2001:
1838:
1609:
1584:
74:. Suja A. Thomas argues the shifting of any power to judges and other branches by the
3639:
3540:
3457:
3340:
3258:
The presence and growth of juries world-wide affirms some value for lay participation
3043:
2951:
1888:
1187:
1183:
1144:
reform, not abolition, is necessary; and that there is no better alternative system.
1073:
745:
718:
702:
340:
195:
2849:
2246:
3535:
3430:
3075:"Federal appeals court upholds judge's lowest possible sentence in child-porn case"
2850:"Jury Sentencing and Juveniles: Eighth Amendment Limits and Sixth Amendment Rights"
1516:
1463:
1057:
773:
762:
505:
493:
481:
426:
422:
129:
125:
70:, judges deciding money damages grand juries not being required in all states, and
60:
1911:"Louisiana Amendment 2, Unanimous Jury Verdict for Felony Trials Amendment (2018)"
1438:
1491:
3530:
3467:
2298:
Rise and Spread of Mandatory Arbitration as a Substitute for the Jury Trial, The
1915:
1053:
843:
690:
556:
519:
442:
438:
315:
3059:
1752:"The Supreme Court outlawed split juries, but hundreds remain in prison anyway"
994:
and sentencing factors by letting the jury decide all the facts. Cases such as
453:
obtain a jury trial if the defendant has validly waived their right to one. In
3405:
3398:
3393:
3378:
1673:
On the Myth of Written Constitutions: The Disappearance of Criminal Jury Trial
1167:
875:
781:
430:
276:
236:
203:
187:
137:
111:
2626:
1424:
3450:
3435:
3415:
3410:
1065:
879:
871:
851:
698:
434:
394:
207:
2752:"Jury Sentencing in Noncapital Cases: An Idea Whose Time Has Come (Again)?"
1404:
1148:"We are better governed because we govern ourselves in part through trial."
1022:
In Virginia, under the 1796 act, capital punishment remained mandatory for
300:
although it is possible that such long an offense could be pushed into the
2570:
Iontcheva, Jenia (April 2003). "Jury Sentencing as Democratic Practice".
863:
777:
686:
666:
662:
658:
654:
650:
327:
120:
states that all trials shall be by jury. The right was expanded with the
25:. It is considered a fundamental principle of the American legal system.
3332:
2736:
2673:
2591:
1978:
1939:"Constitution Requires Unanimous Criminal Jury Verdicts for Conviction"
807:
694:
682:
674:
323:
2775:
2264:
Alternative Dispute Resolution: Panacea or Anathema; Edwards, Harry T.
1814:"U.S. Supreme Court Mandates Juror Unanimity in State Criminal Trials"
2130:
Fetish of Jury Trial in Civil Cases: A Comment on Rachal v. Hill, The
847:
737:
441:
resulting in a plea bargain. If the defendant waives a jury trial, a
2873:"Virginia judges rarely question juries' sentencing recommendations"
2728:
2665:
2583:
2767:
2186:
The Right to Trial by Jury in Bankruptcy: Which Judge is to Preside
496:. Actions at law had a right to a jury, actions in equity did not.
670:
617:
319:
85:
55:
The American system utilizes three types of juries: Investigative
2608:
The development of American prisons and prison customs, 1776–1845
1884:"Louisiana votes to eliminate Jim Crow jury law with Amendment 2"
1223:"The Constitution - Full Text | The National Constitution Center"
1018:
Plea bargains, judicial override, and juror access to information
272:
may choose whether or not to permit trial by jury in such cases.
21:
A citizen's right to a trial by jury is a central feature of the
3363:
2169:
Right to Strike the Jury Trial Demand in Complex Litigation, The
1134:
3336:
476:
The right to trial by jury in a civil case is addressed by the
437:
often have a strong interest in resolving the criminal case by
3246:. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. pp. 232–234.
2906:"Virginia eyes new sentences after juries didn't get key fact"
1860:
1756:
1279:. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. pp. 185–187.
330:, which provide the defendant with the right to a jury trial
147:
noted the importance of the jury right in its 1968 ruling of
3196:. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. pp. 84–85.
3168:. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. pp. 67–68.
3143:. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. pp. 62–64.
2346:"The Origins of Felony Jury Sentencing in the United States"
1329:. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. pp. 15–16.
425:
cases are not concluded with a jury verdict, but rather by
3302:. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. pp. 132–134.
3221:. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. pp. 3–6.
2081:
Right to a Jury Trial in Civil Actions; James, Fleming Jr.
1304:. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. pp. 118–119.
1174:
thought the jury was essential as a check against judges.
705:
had jury sentencing in times past, but then abandoned it.
407:
the unanimity requirement against the states, overturning
1676:, vol. 15, Harv. J. L. & Pub. Pol'y, p. 119
810:, which did not establish penitentiaries until after the
2975:"Number of juried trials slumps both in Va., nationwide"
2715:"Statutory Structures for Sentencing Felons to Prison".
1357:. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. p. 24.
571:, and thus up to the judge's discretion, not a jury. In
3274:. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. p. 7.
2127:
Shapiro, David L.; Coquillette, Daniel R. (1971–1972),
724:
Virginia was the first state to adopt jury sentencing.
2513:
ILL, ANN. STAT. ch. 38, § 754a (Smith-Hurd Supp. 1959)
728:
was enacted in 1776, and shortly thereafter, in 1779,
3105:
Eisenberg, Theodore; Clermont, Kevin M. (1995–1996),
2284:, vol. 16, Ohio St. J. Disp. Resol., p. 669
2267:, vol. 99, Harv. L. Rev., 1985–1986, p. 668
1409:. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. p. 134.
486:
Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States
1090:
Seventh Amendments to the United States Constitution
186:, in the United States, is impaneled to try federal
3617:
3549:
3486:
3371:
2871:Kelly, Ashley and Dujardin, Peter (April 1, 2012).
736:a revised criminal code that would have eliminated
522:rights and authorize the judge to strike the jury.
472:
Seventh Amendment to the United States Constitution
134:
Seventh Amendment to the United States Constitution
110:of "depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of
2145:"CRS/LII Annotated Constitution Seventh Amendment"
2054:"The Constitution of the United States of America"
1008:Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution
610:"knowing-consent" standard in order to be upheld.
3042:Ribeiro, Gianni; Antrobus, Emma (November 2017).
2084:, vol. 72, Yale L.J., 1962–1963, p. 655
1693:, vol. 20, Wm. Mitchell L. Rev., p. 835
818:have been due to a mistrust of unelected judges.
122:Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution
2565:
2563:
2561:
2559:
2557:
1146:
259:Article Three of the United States Constitution
2555:
2553:
2551:
2549:
2547:
2545:
2543:
2541:
2539:
2537:
814:, also left sentencing to judges' discretion.
3348:
3128:, vol. 12, J. Am. Jud. Soc., p. 166
3091:Federal Civil Jury Trials Should Be Abolished
2921:"House Courts subcommittee kills parole bill"
2791:"The Sixth Amendment and Criminal Sentencing"
2789:Bibas, Stephanos and Klein, Susan R. (2008).
2172:, vol. 34, U. Miami L. Rev., p. 243
1492:"Rule 48. Number of Jurors; Verdict; Polling"
866:, social circumstances, random breeding, and
8:
2889:: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
2807:: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
2475:election of one who assesses the punishment.
2339:
2337:
2335:
2333:
2331:
2329:
2327:
2325:
2189:, vol. 63, Am. Bankr. L.J., p. 53
2101:, vol. 70, Nw. U. L. Rev., p. 486
1204:Democratic backsliding in the United States
870:, rather than an abuse of divinely-granted
3355:
3341:
3333:
2531:TENN. CODE ANN. §§ 40-2704 to −2707 (1955)
2301:, vol. 38, U.S.F. L. Rev., p. 17
2133:, vol. 85, Harv. L. Rev., p. 442
1567:
1565:
1486:
1484:
3108:Trial by Jury or Judge: Which is Speedier
2372:
2110:
2108:
1080:Arguments for and against jury sentencing
2687:
2685:
2683:
1192:1998 Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement
673:, and Virginia have sentencing by jury.
3516:Racial discrimination in jury selection
3111:, vol. 79, Judicature, p. 176
1214:
1042:United States Court of Military Appeals
622:A nineteenth-century painting of a jury
190:and to indict and try those accused by
3125:Program for the Trial of Jury Trial, A
3094:, vol. 60, A.B.A. J., p. 570
2882:
2800:
2522:MONT. REV. CODES ANN. § 94-7411 (1947)
2470:"63 TEX.CODE CRIM.PROC. art. 37.07(b)"
2394:
2383:
836:The 1895 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in
3293:
3291:
2019:, Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure
1843:, Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure
1539:
1537:
772:In contrast, northern states such as
529:cases has been described as unclear.
7:
2654:The University of Chicago Law Review
2627:"Jury Sentencing – Grab-Bag Justice"
2367:"59 ARK.CODE ANN. § 5-4-103". 2010.
1348:
1346:
1270:
1268:
118:Article III of the U.S. Constitution
1854:de Vogue, Ariana (April 20, 2020).
1783:"Amdt6.4.4.3 Unanimity of the Jury"
930:Possible revival of jury sentencing
628:Jury selection in the United States
492:into actions at law and actions in
2723:(8): 1134–1172. December 1, 1960.
2611:. Prison Association of New York.
2251:, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
1882:Lopez, German (November 6, 2018).
1646:Blanton v. City of North Las Vegas
450:Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure
377:Supreme Court of the United States
92:Boone County Courthouse (Arkansas)
14:
2973:Green, Frank (October 18, 2009).
2908:. Fredericksburg Free-Lance Star.
2904:Durkin, Alana (January 1, 2016).
2831:University of Illinois Law Review
2822:Carrington, Melissa (Fall 2011).
2648:Alschuler, Albert (Winter 2003).
2295:Sternlight, Jean R. (2003–2004),
2278:Sternlight, Jean R. (2000–2001),
1937:Volokh, Eugene (April 20, 2020).
1521:LII / Legal Information Institute
1496:LII / Legal Information Institute
1468:LII / Legal Information Institute
1443:LII / Legal Information Institute
1123:6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
601:is becoming increasingly common.
310:constitution-makers use lightly.
265:this right against the states in
230:Grand juries in the United States
90:Jury box in the courtroom at the
2992:Remkus, Ashley (July 21, 2017).
2919:Ress, David (January 21, 2019).
1464:"Rule 23. Jury or Nonjury Trial"
547:Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
542:Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
104:U.S. Declaration of Independence
16:Jury system in the United States
3625:Fully Informed Jury Association
3325:Commission on the American Jury
3300:The death of the American trial
2413:"60 KY.REV.STAT.ANN. § 532.055"
2095:Redish, Martin H. (1975–1976),
2056:. Gpoaccess.gov. Archived from
1750:Breslow, Jason (May 14, 2023).
1406:The death of the American trial
1302:The death of the American trial
951:, such as those imposed by the
588:Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
552:Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
3122:Wigmore, John H. (1928–1929),
3073:Heisig, Eric (June 29, 2016).
2750:Lanni, Adriaan (May 1, 1999).
2694:"The Case for Jury Sentencing"
2504:GA. CODE ANN. § 27-2502 (1953)
2443:"61 MO.REV.STAT. § 557.036(3)"
2117:, 435 F.2d 59 (5th. Cir. 1970)
2016:Rule 23. Jury or Nonjury Trial
1135:Jury § Jury effectiveness
990:about the differences between
942:racial disparity in sentencing
857:These systems were based on a
726:The state's first constitution
599:Alternative dispute resolution
525:The right to trial by jury in
1:
603:Mandatory binding arbitration
252:Scope of constitutional right
169:Women in United States juries
163:Women in United States juries
2625:Webster, Charles W. (1960).
2166:Oakes, Jeffrey (1979–1980),
1012:cruel and unusual punishment
821:During the ten years of the
717:sanctions and the mandatory
318:. The three exceptions are
3646:Juries in the United States
2223:Beacon Theaters v. Westover
1788:Legal Information Institute
1162:Founding fathers including
949:mandatory minimum sentences
574:Beacon Theaters v. Westover
3674:
3088:Devitt, Edward J. (1974),
3060:10.1525/nclr.2017.20.4.535
2848:Russell, Sarah F. (2015).
1687:Larsen, Korine L. (1994),
1670:Langbein, John H. (1992),
1155:Death of the American Jury
1132:
978:and related cases such as
832:Decline of jury sentencing
748:had reintroduced it while
632:Jurors in some states are
625:
469:
421:The vast majority of U.S.
227:
166:
23:United States Constitution
3526:Scientific jury selection
3298:Burns, Robert P. (2009).
2956:Wm.& Mary Bill RTS. J
2488:"VA.CODE ANN. § 19.2-295"
1403:Burns, Robert P. (2009).
1300:Burns, Robert P. (2009).
1084:An argument based on the
734:Virginia General Assembly
214:Federal jury trial rights
3329:American Bar Association
3270:Thomas, Suja A. (2016).
3242:Thomas, Suja A. (2016).
3217:Thomas, Suja A. (2016).
3192:Thomas, Suja A. (2016).
3164:Thomas, Suja A. (2016).
3139:Thomas, Suja A. (2016).
3007:Kirgis, Paul F. (2005).
2950:Stone, Caleb R. (2014).
1439:"Rule 6. The Grand Jury"
1353:Thomas, Suja A. (2016).
1325:Thomas, Suja A. (2016).
1275:Thomas, Suja A. (2016).
916:indeterminate sentencing
36:) and four times in the
3048:New Criminal Law Review
2344:King, Nancy J. (2003).
2183:Cyr, Conrad K. (1989),
2030:Patton v. United States
1991:Singer v. United States
1517:"Rule 31. Jury Verdict"
987:United States v. Booker
904:McKeiver v Pennsylvania
750:Jefferson was in France
709:Rise of jury sentencing
455:Patton v. United States
359:Sentencing enhancements
192:United States Attorneys
3550:Specific jurisdictions
2415:. 2010. Archived from
2393:Cite journal requires
2312:Ware, Stephen (2003),
1704:Apprendi v. New Jersey
1622:Frank v. United States
1227:constitutioncenter.org
1160:
1110:deliberative democracy
992:elements of an offense
962:Apprendi v. New Jersey
839:Sparf v. United States
645:Jury-imposed sentences
623:
607:Arbitration agreements
366:Apprendi v. New Jersey
160:
95:
34:Article III, Section 2
3019:(897). Archived from
2060:on September 19, 2008
1727:Blakely v. Washington
1099:judicial independence
1049:sentencing guidelines
981:Blakely v. Washington
953:Rockefeller Drug Laws
937:Sentencing Reform Act
621:
372:Blakely v. Washington
155:
136:, which guarantees a
89:
3511:Peremptory challenge
3501:Death-qualified jury
3023:on September 6, 2019
2756:The Yale Law Journal
2605:Lewis, O.F. (1922).
1549:United States Courts
1252:United States Courts
891:parole commissioners
767:solitary confinement
565:specific performance
346:Justice of the Peace
307:alcohol use disorder
285:Chief Justice Burger
261:. The Supreme Court
3651:Deliberative groups
2795:Faculty Scholarship
2717:Columbia Law Review
2692:Hoffman, Morris B.
2572:Virginia Law Review
2419:on January 31, 2017
1967:Columbia Law Review
1598:Williams v. Florida
1573:Baldwin v. New York
1379:Duncan v. Louisiana
1032:truth in sentencing
1024:first-degree murder
795:George Keith Taylor
296:months or less are
268:Duncan v. Louisiana
150:Duncan v. Louisiana
3506:Jury questionnaire
3478:Summary jury trial
3463:Jury sequestration
3441:Jury nullification
3384:Citizens' assembly
2200:Colgrove v. Battin
1793:Cornell Law School
1172:Alexander Hamilton
1010:'s prohibition of
886:Probation officers
868:Darwinian struggle
812:American Civil War
639:Jury Selection Act
624:
579:U.S. Supreme Court
569:equitable remedies
535:Colgrove v. Battin
403:the Supreme Court
400:Ramos v. Louisiana
200:federal grand jury
145:U.S. Supreme Court
96:
3633:
3632:
3562:England and Wales
3421:Jury instructions
3366:-related articles
3309:978-0-226-08126-7
3281:978-1-107-05565-0
3253:978-1-107-05565-0
3228:978-1-107-05565-0
3203:978-1-107-05565-0
3175:978-1-107-05565-0
3150:978-1-107-05565-0
2931:on April 19, 2019
2147:. Law.cornell.edu
1545:"Types of Juries"
1416:978-0-226-08126-7
1364:978-1-107-05565-0
1336:978-1-107-05565-0
1311:978-0-226-08126-7
1286:978-1-107-05565-0
1248:"Types of Juries"
1003:Graham v. Florida
997:Miller v. Alabama
957:three-strikes law
955:and California's
823:Republic of Texas
758:John Breckenridge
742:benefit of clergy
484:'s 1833 treatise
466:Seventh Amendment
410:Apodaca v. Oregon
3663:
3656:Direct democracy
3521:Strike for cause
3473:Juror misconduct
3426:Specific finding
3372:Primary articles
3357:
3350:
3343:
3334:
3314:
3313:
3295:
3286:
3285:
3267:
3261:
3260:
3239:
3233:
3232:
3214:
3208:
3207:
3189:
3183:
3182:
3161:
3155:
3154:
3136:
3130:
3129:
3119:
3113:
3112:
3102:
3096:
3095:
3085:
3079:
3078:
3077:. Cleveland.com.
3070:
3064:
3063:
3039:
3033:
3032:
3030:
3028:
3004:
2998:
2997:
2989:
2983:
2982:
2970:
2964:
2963:
2947:
2941:
2940:
2938:
2936:
2927:. Archived from
2916:
2910:
2909:
2901:
2895:
2894:
2888:
2880:
2868:
2862:
2861:
2845:
2839:
2838:
2828:
2819:
2813:
2812:
2806:
2798:
2786:
2780:
2779:
2762:(7): 1775–1803.
2747:
2741:
2740:
2712:
2706:
2705:
2698:Duke Law Journal
2689:
2678:
2677:
2645:
2639:
2638:
2622:
2616:
2615:
2602:
2596:
2595:
2567:
2532:
2529:
2523:
2520:
2514:
2511:
2505:
2502:
2496:
2495:
2484:
2478:
2477:
2466:
2460:
2456:
2450:
2449:
2439:
2433:
2432:
2426:
2424:
2409:
2403:
2402:
2396:
2391:
2389:
2381:
2376:
2364:
2358:
2357:
2350:Chi.-Kent L. Rev
2341:
2320:
2319:
2309:
2303:
2302:
2292:
2286:
2285:
2275:
2269:
2268:
2259:
2253:
2252:
2243:
2237:
2220:
2214:
2197:
2191:
2190:
2180:
2174:
2173:
2163:
2157:
2156:
2154:
2152:
2141:
2135:
2134:
2124:
2118:
2112:
2103:
2102:
2092:
2086:
2085:
2076:
2070:
2069:
2067:
2065:
2050:
2044:
2027:
2021:
2020:
2011:
2005:
1988:
1982:
1981:
1962:
1956:
1955:
1953:
1951:
1934:
1928:
1927:
1925:
1923:
1907:
1901:
1900:
1898:
1896:
1879:
1873:
1872:
1870:
1868:
1851:
1845:
1844:
1835:
1829:
1828:
1823:
1821:
1810:
1804:
1803:
1801:
1799:
1779:
1773:
1772:
1766:
1764:
1747:
1741:
1724:
1718:
1701:
1695:
1694:
1684:
1678:
1677:
1667:
1661:
1642:
1636:
1619:
1613:
1594:
1588:
1569:
1560:
1559:
1557:
1555:
1541:
1532:
1531:
1529:
1527:
1513:
1507:
1506:
1504:
1502:
1488:
1479:
1478:
1476:
1474:
1460:
1454:
1453:
1451:
1449:
1435:
1429:
1428:
1400:
1394:
1375:
1369:
1368:
1350:
1341:
1340:
1322:
1316:
1315:
1297:
1291:
1290:
1272:
1263:
1262:
1260:
1258:
1244:
1238:
1237:
1235:
1233:
1219:
1182:, Nancy Marder,
1164:Thomas Jefferson
1158:
859:consequentialist
732:proposed to the
730:Thomas Jefferson
499:The decision in
140:in civil cases.
68:summary judgment
3673:
3672:
3666:
3665:
3664:
3662:
3661:
3660:
3636:
3635:
3634:
3629:
3613:
3545:
3496:Change of venue
3482:
3367:
3361:
3322:
3317:
3310:
3297:
3296:
3289:
3282:
3269:
3268:
3264:
3254:
3241:
3240:
3236:
3229:
3216:
3215:
3211:
3204:
3191:
3190:
3186:
3176:
3163:
3162:
3158:
3151:
3138:
3137:
3133:
3121:
3120:
3116:
3104:
3103:
3099:
3087:
3086:
3082:
3072:
3071:
3067:
3041:
3040:
3036:
3026:
3024:
3006:
3005:
3001:
2991:
2990:
2986:
2972:
2971:
2967:
2949:
2948:
2944:
2934:
2932:
2918:
2917:
2913:
2903:
2902:
2898:
2881:
2870:
2869:
2865:
2847:
2846:
2842:
2837:(4): 1359–1385.
2826:
2821:
2820:
2816:
2799:
2788:
2787:
2783:
2749:
2748:
2744:
2729:10.2307/1120351
2714:
2713:
2709:
2691:
2690:
2681:
2666:10.2307/1600541
2647:
2646:
2642:
2624:
2623:
2619:
2604:
2603:
2599:
2584:10.2307/3202435
2569:
2568:
2535:
2530:
2526:
2521:
2517:
2512:
2508:
2503:
2499:
2486:
2485:
2481:
2468:
2467:
2463:
2457:
2453:
2441:
2440:
2436:
2422:
2420:
2411:
2410:
2406:
2392:
2382:
2374:10.1.1.173.1272
2366:
2365:
2361:
2343:
2342:
2323:
2311:
2310:
2306:
2294:
2293:
2289:
2277:
2276:
2272:
2261:
2260:
2256:
2245:
2244:
2240:
2221:
2217:
2198:
2194:
2182:
2181:
2177:
2165:
2164:
2160:
2150:
2148:
2143:
2142:
2138:
2126:
2125:
2121:
2113:
2106:
2094:
2093:
2089:
2078:
2077:
2073:
2063:
2061:
2052:
2051:
2047:
2028:
2024:
2013:
2012:
2008:
1989:
1985:
1973:(4): 959–1009,
1964:
1963:
1959:
1949:
1947:
1936:
1935:
1931:
1921:
1919:
1909:
1908:
1904:
1894:
1892:
1881:
1880:
1876:
1866:
1864:
1853:
1852:
1848:
1837:
1836:
1832:
1819:
1817:
1816:. July 23, 2020
1812:
1811:
1807:
1797:
1795:
1781:
1780:
1776:
1762:
1760:
1749:
1748:
1744:
1725:
1721:
1702:
1698:
1686:
1685:
1681:
1669:
1668:
1664:
1643:
1639:
1620:
1616:
1595:
1591:
1570:
1563:
1553:
1551:
1543:
1542:
1535:
1525:
1523:
1515:
1514:
1510:
1500:
1498:
1490:
1489:
1482:
1472:
1470:
1462:
1461:
1457:
1447:
1445:
1437:
1436:
1432:
1417:
1402:
1401:
1397:
1376:
1372:
1365:
1352:
1351:
1344:
1337:
1324:
1323:
1319:
1312:
1299:
1298:
1294:
1287:
1274:
1273:
1266:
1256:
1254:
1246:
1245:
1241:
1231:
1229:
1221:
1220:
1216:
1212:
1200:
1159:
1152:
1141:court calendars
1137:
1131:
1082:
1068:at sentencing.
1020:
968:Ring v. Arizona
932:
834:
711:
647:
630:
616:
596:
544:
474:
468:
463:
419:
390:
361:
293:Justice Stewart
281:Justice Douglas
254:
245:
232:
226:
221:
219:Criminal juries
216:
180:
171:
165:
84:
72:plea-bargaining
17:
12:
11:
5:
3671:
3670:
3667:
3659:
3658:
3653:
3648:
3638:
3637:
3631:
3630:
3628:
3627:
3621:
3619:
3615:
3614:
3612:
3611:
3610:
3609:
3604:
3599:
3597:Jury selection
3594:
3584:
3579:
3574:
3569:
3564:
3559:
3553:
3551:
3547:
3546:
3544:
3543:
3538:
3533:
3528:
3523:
3518:
3513:
3508:
3503:
3498:
3492:
3490:
3488:Jury selection
3484:
3483:
3481:
3480:
3475:
3470:
3465:
3460:
3455:
3454:
3453:
3446:Jury tampering
3443:
3438:
3433:
3428:
3423:
3418:
3413:
3408:
3403:
3402:
3401:
3391:
3389:Coroner's jury
3386:
3381:
3375:
3373:
3369:
3368:
3362:
3360:
3359:
3352:
3345:
3337:
3321:
3320:External links
3318:
3316:
3315:
3308:
3287:
3280:
3262:
3252:
3234:
3227:
3209:
3202:
3184:
3174:
3156:
3149:
3131:
3114:
3097:
3080:
3065:
3054:(4): 535–568.
3034:
2999:
2984:
2979:Daily Progress
2965:
2942:
2911:
2896:
2863:
2840:
2814:
2781:
2768:10.2307/797450
2742:
2707:
2679:
2640:
2617:
2597:
2578:(2): 311–383.
2533:
2524:
2515:
2506:
2497:
2479:
2461:
2451:
2434:
2404:
2395:|journal=
2359:
2321:
2304:
2287:
2270:
2254:
2238:
2215:
2192:
2175:
2158:
2136:
2119:
2115:Rachal v. Hill
2104:
2087:
2071:
2045:
2022:
2006:
1983:
1957:
1929:
1902:
1874:
1846:
1830:
1805:
1774:
1742:
1719:
1696:
1679:
1662:
1637:
1614:
1589:
1561:
1533:
1508:
1480:
1455:
1430:
1415:
1395:
1370:
1363:
1342:
1335:
1317:
1310:
1292:
1285:
1264:
1239:
1213:
1211:
1208:
1207:
1206:
1199:
1196:
1153:Robert Burns,
1150:
1130:
1127:
1081:
1078:
1019:
1016:
931:
928:
923:rehabilitative
909:Harry Blackmun
833:
830:
804:South Carolina
800:North Carolina
710:
707:
646:
643:
626:Main article:
615:
614:Jury selection
612:
595:
592:
543:
540:
501:Rachal v. Hill
470:Main article:
467:
464:
462:
459:
418:
415:
389:
386:
382:federal courts
360:
357:
353:juvenile court
289:Justice Harlan
253:
250:
244:
241:
228:Main article:
225:
222:
220:
217:
215:
212:
196:federal crimes
179:
176:
167:Main article:
164:
161:
83:
80:
38:Bill of Rights
30:American Samoa
15:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
3669:
3668:
3657:
3654:
3652:
3649:
3647:
3644:
3643:
3641:
3626:
3623:
3622:
3620:
3616:
3608:
3605:
3603:
3602:Nullification
3600:
3598:
3595:
3593:
3592:U.S. military
3590:
3589:
3588:
3587:United States
3585:
3583:
3580:
3578:
3575:
3573:
3570:
3568:
3565:
3563:
3560:
3558:
3555:
3554:
3552:
3548:
3542:
3541:Stealth juror
3539:
3537:
3534:
3532:
3529:
3527:
3524:
3522:
3519:
3517:
3514:
3512:
3509:
3507:
3504:
3502:
3499:
3497:
3494:
3493:
3491:
3489:
3485:
3479:
3476:
3474:
3471:
3469:
3466:
3464:
3461:
3459:
3458:Jury research
3456:
3452:
3449:
3448:
3447:
3444:
3442:
3439:
3437:
3434:
3432:
3429:
3427:
3424:
3422:
3419:
3417:
3414:
3412:
3409:
3407:
3404:
3400:
3397:
3396:
3395:
3392:
3390:
3387:
3385:
3382:
3380:
3377:
3376:
3374:
3370:
3365:
3358:
3353:
3351:
3346:
3344:
3339:
3338:
3335:
3331:
3330:
3326:
3319:
3311:
3305:
3301:
3294:
3292:
3288:
3283:
3277:
3273:
3266:
3263:
3259:
3255:
3249:
3245:
3238:
3235:
3230:
3224:
3220:
3213:
3210:
3205:
3199:
3195:
3188:
3185:
3181:
3177:
3171:
3167:
3160:
3157:
3152:
3146:
3142:
3135:
3132:
3127:
3126:
3118:
3115:
3110:
3109:
3101:
3098:
3093:
3092:
3084:
3081:
3076:
3069:
3066:
3061:
3057:
3053:
3049:
3045:
3038:
3035:
3022:
3018:
3014:
3010:
3003:
3000:
2995:
2988:
2985:
2980:
2976:
2969:
2966:
2961:
2957:
2953:
2946:
2943:
2930:
2926:
2922:
2915:
2912:
2907:
2900:
2897:
2892:
2886:
2878:
2874:
2867:
2864:
2859:
2855:
2851:
2844:
2841:
2836:
2832:
2825:
2818:
2815:
2810:
2804:
2796:
2792:
2785:
2782:
2777:
2773:
2769:
2765:
2761:
2757:
2753:
2746:
2743:
2738:
2734:
2730:
2726:
2722:
2718:
2711:
2708:
2703:
2699:
2695:
2688:
2686:
2684:
2680:
2675:
2671:
2667:
2663:
2659:
2655:
2651:
2644:
2641:
2636:
2632:
2628:
2621:
2618:
2614:
2610:
2609:
2601:
2598:
2593:
2589:
2585:
2581:
2577:
2573:
2566:
2564:
2562:
2560:
2558:
2556:
2554:
2552:
2550:
2548:
2546:
2544:
2542:
2540:
2538:
2534:
2528:
2525:
2519:
2516:
2510:
2507:
2501:
2498:
2494:
2489:
2483:
2480:
2476:
2471:
2465:
2462:
2455:
2452:
2448:
2444:
2438:
2435:
2431:
2418:
2414:
2408:
2405:
2400:
2387:
2380:
2375:
2370:
2363:
2360:
2355:
2351:
2347:
2340:
2338:
2336:
2334:
2332:
2330:
2328:
2326:
2322:
2317:
2316:
2308:
2305:
2300:
2299:
2291:
2288:
2283:
2282:
2274:
2271:
2266:
2265:
2258:
2255:
2250:
2249:
2242:
2239:
2235:
2232:
2228:
2224:
2219:
2216:
2212:
2209:
2205:
2201:
2196:
2193:
2188:
2187:
2179:
2176:
2171:
2170:
2162:
2159:
2146:
2140:
2137:
2132:
2131:
2123:
2120:
2116:
2111:
2109:
2105:
2100:
2099:
2091:
2088:
2083:
2082:
2075:
2072:
2059:
2055:
2049:
2046:
2042:
2039:
2035:
2031:
2026:
2023:
2018:
2017:
2010:
2007:
2003:
2000:
1996:
1992:
1987:
1984:
1980:
1976:
1972:
1968:
1961:
1958:
1946:
1945:
1940:
1933:
1930:
1918:
1917:
1912:
1906:
1903:
1891:
1890:
1885:
1878:
1875:
1863:
1862:
1857:
1850:
1847:
1842:
1841:
1834:
1831:
1827:
1815:
1809:
1806:
1794:
1790:
1789:
1784:
1778:
1775:
1771:
1759:
1758:
1753:
1746:
1743:
1739:
1736:
1732:
1728:
1723:
1720:
1716:
1713:
1709:
1705:
1700:
1697:
1692:
1691:
1683:
1680:
1675:
1674:
1666:
1663:
1659:
1656:
1652:
1648:
1647:
1641:
1638:
1634:
1631:
1627:
1623:
1618:
1615:
1611:
1608:
1604:
1600:
1599:
1593:
1590:
1586:
1583:
1579:
1575:
1574:
1568:
1566:
1562:
1550:
1546:
1540:
1538:
1534:
1522:
1518:
1512:
1509:
1497:
1493:
1487:
1485:
1481:
1469:
1465:
1459:
1456:
1444:
1440:
1434:
1431:
1426:
1422:
1418:
1412:
1408:
1407:
1399:
1396:
1392:
1389:
1385:
1381:
1380:
1374:
1371:
1366:
1360:
1356:
1349:
1347:
1343:
1338:
1332:
1328:
1321:
1318:
1313:
1307:
1303:
1296:
1293:
1288:
1282:
1278:
1271:
1269:
1265:
1253:
1249:
1243:
1240:
1228:
1224:
1218:
1215:
1209:
1205:
1202:
1201:
1197:
1195:
1193:
1189:
1188:Rachel Barkow
1185:
1184:Roger Fairfax
1181:
1177:
1173:
1169:
1165:
1156:
1149:
1145:
1142:
1136:
1128:
1126:
1124:
1118:
1114:
1111:
1106:
1102:
1100:
1094:
1091:
1087:
1079:
1077:
1075:
1074:Joe Morrissey
1069:
1067:
1061:
1059:
1058:plea bargains
1055:
1050:
1045:
1043:
1038:
1033:
1027:
1025:
1017:
1015:
1013:
1009:
1005:
1004:
999:
998:
993:
989:
988:
983:
982:
977:
972:
970:
969:
964:
963:
958:
954:
950:
945:
943:
938:
929:
927:
924:
919:
917:
912:
910:
906:
905:
898:
894:
892:
887:
883:
881:
877:
873:
869:
865:
860:
855:
853:
849:
845:
841:
840:
831:
829:
826:
824:
819:
815:
813:
809:
805:
801:
796:
792:
787:
783:
779:
775:
770:
768:
764:
759:
753:
751:
747:
746:James Madison
743:
739:
735:
731:
727:
722:
720:
719:death penalty
716:
708:
706:
704:
703:West Virginia
700:
696:
692:
688:
684:
680:
676:
672:
668:
664:
660:
656:
652:
644:
642:
640:
635:
629:
620:
613:
611:
608:
604:
600:
593:
591:
589:
583:
580:
576:
575:
570:
566:
562:
558:
553:
548:
541:
539:
537:
536:
530:
528:
523:
521:
516:
513:
510:
508:
507:
502:
497:
495:
489:
487:
483:
479:
478:7th Amendment
473:
465:
460:
458:
456:
451:
446:
444:
440:
436:
432:
428:
424:
416:
414:
412:
411:
406:
402:
401:
396:
387:
385:
383:
378:
374:
373:
368:
367:
363:In the cases
358:
356:
354:
349:
347:
343:
342:
341:trial de novo
337:
333:
329:
325:
321:
317:
311:
308:
303:
299:
294:
290:
286:
282:
278:
277:Justice Black
273:
270:
269:
264:
260:
251:
249:
242:
240:
238:
231:
223:
218:
213:
211:
209:
205:
201:
197:
193:
189:
185:
177:
175:
170:
162:
159:
154:
152:
151:
146:
141:
139:
135:
131:
127:
123:
119:
115:
113:
112:trial by jury
109:
105:
100:
93:
88:
81:
79:
77:
76:Supreme Court
73:
69:
64:
62:
58:
53:
52:Amendments).
51:
47:
43:
39:
35:
31:
26:
24:
19:
3586:
3536:Special jury
3431:Deliberation
3323:
3299:
3271:
3265:
3257:
3243:
3237:
3218:
3212:
3193:
3187:
3179:
3165:
3159:
3140:
3134:
3124:
3117:
3107:
3100:
3090:
3083:
3068:
3051:
3047:
3037:
3027:February 26,
3025:. Retrieved
3021:the original
3016:
3012:
3002:
2987:
2978:
2968:
2959:
2955:
2945:
2935:February 26,
2933:. Retrieved
2929:the original
2924:
2914:
2899:
2876:
2866:
2857:
2853:
2843:
2834:
2830:
2817:
2803:cite journal
2794:
2784:
2759:
2755:
2745:
2720:
2716:
2710:
2701:
2697:
2657:
2653:
2643:
2634:
2630:
2620:
2612:
2607:
2600:
2575:
2571:
2527:
2518:
2509:
2500:
2491:
2482:
2473:
2464:
2454:
2446:
2437:
2428:
2423:February 26,
2421:. Retrieved
2417:the original
2407:
2386:cite journal
2378:
2362:
2353:
2349:
2314:
2307:
2297:
2290:
2280:
2273:
2263:
2257:
2247:
2241:
2222:
2218:
2199:
2195:
2185:
2178:
2168:
2161:
2151:September 6,
2149:. Retrieved
2139:
2129:
2122:
2114:
2097:
2090:
2080:
2074:
2064:September 6,
2062:. Retrieved
2058:the original
2048:
2029:
2025:
2015:
2009:
1990:
1986:
1970:
1966:
1960:
1948:. Retrieved
1942:
1932:
1920:. Retrieved
1914:
1905:
1893:. Retrieved
1887:
1877:
1865:. Retrieved
1859:
1849:
1839:
1833:
1825:
1818:. Retrieved
1808:
1796:. Retrieved
1786:
1777:
1768:
1761:. Retrieved
1755:
1745:
1726:
1722:
1703:
1699:
1689:
1682:
1672:
1665:
1644:
1640:
1621:
1617:
1596:
1592:
1571:
1552:. Retrieved
1548:
1524:. Retrieved
1520:
1511:
1499:. Retrieved
1495:
1471:. Retrieved
1467:
1458:
1446:. Retrieved
1442:
1433:
1405:
1398:
1393: (1968).
1377:
1373:
1354:
1326:
1320:
1301:
1295:
1276:
1255:. Retrieved
1251:
1242:
1230:. Retrieved
1226:
1217:
1176:James Wilson
1161:
1154:
1147:
1138:
1119:
1115:
1107:
1103:
1095:
1083:
1070:
1062:
1054:bench trials
1046:
1028:
1021:
1001:
995:
985:
979:
975:
973:
966:
960:
946:
933:
920:
913:
902:
899:
895:
884:
856:
837:
835:
827:
820:
816:
774:Pennsylvania
771:
763:flagellation
754:
723:
712:
648:
631:
597:
584:
572:
545:
533:
531:
524:
517:
514:
511:
506:res judicata
504:
500:
498:
490:
485:
482:Joseph Story
475:
461:Civil juries
454:
447:
427:plea bargain
420:
408:
405:incorporated
398:
391:
370:
364:
362:
350:
339:
335:
332:in all cases
331:
316:bench trials
312:
301:
297:
274:
266:
263:incorporated
255:
246:
233:
184:federal jury
183:
181:
178:Federal jury
172:
156:
148:
142:
130:public trial
116:
101:
97:
65:
61:petit juries
57:grand juries
54:
27:
20:
18:
3531:Struck jury
3468:Jury stress
2925:Daily Press
2877:Daily Press
2660:(1): 1–22.
2318:, USFL Rev.
2236: (1959)
2213: (1973)
2043: (1930)
2004: (1965)
1916:Ballotpedia
1740: (2004)
1717: (2000)
1660: (1989)
1635: (1969)
1612: (1970)
1587: (1970)
1554:December 1,
1257:February 2,
1232:February 2,
844:rule of law
791:Federalists
691:Mississippi
557:injunctions
520:due process
443:bench trial
439:negotiation
431:prosecutors
188:civil cases
3640:Categories
3406:Petit jury
3399:Indictment
3394:Grand jury
3379:Jury trial
3013:Ga. L. Rev
2854:B.C.L. Rev
1526:January 7,
1473:January 7,
1448:January 7,
1210:References
1180:Akhil Amar
1168:John Adams
1133:See also:
876:Psychology
782:New Jersey
561:rescission
527:bankruptcy
435:defendants
243:Petit jury
224:Grand jury
204:petit jury
138:jury trial
108:George III
48:, and the
3567:Hong Kong
3451:Embracery
3436:Hung jury
3416:Jury fees
3411:Jury duty
2996:. AL.com.
2885:cite news
2369:CiteSeerX
1922:August 8,
1867:April 20,
1501:August 8,
1425:243845474
1129:Reception
1066:hung jury
880:sociology
872:free will
854:systems.
852:probation
699:Tennessee
567:were all
395:hung jury
388:Unanimity
208:unanimous
3577:Scotland
2490:. 2011.
2472:. 2009.
2459:. . .").
2445:. 2013.
1198:See also
1157:, p. 118
1151:—
976:Apprendi
864:heredity
786:New York
778:Maryland
687:Illinois
667:Oklahoma
663:Missouri
659:Kentucky
655:Arkansas
651:Virginia
634:selected
423:criminal
328:Virginia
237:indicted
106:accused
40:(in the
2737:1120351
2674:1600541
2592:3202435
2248:Rule 48
1979:4099426
1950:May 29,
1895:May 19,
1840:Rule 31
1820:May 29,
1798:May 29,
1770:fervor.
1763:May 29,
808:Florida
738:pardons
715:shaming
695:Montana
683:Indiana
679:Georgia
675:Alabama
429:. Both
324:Vermont
302:serious
82:History
50:Seventh
3618:Groups
3582:Taiwan
3557:Canada
3306:
3278:
3250:
3225:
3200:
3172:
3147:
2962:(559).
2860:(553).
2797:(921).
2776:797450
2774:
2735:
2704:(951).
2672:
2637:(221).
2631:Sw L.J
2590:
2371:
2356:(937).
1977:
1944:Reason
1423:
1413:
1361:
1333:
1308:
1283:
1170:, and
1037:jurors
848:parole
806:, and
784:, and
701:, and
594:Waiver
577:, the
563:, and
494:equity
417:Waiver
375:, the
369:, and
326:, and
298:petty,
126:speedy
44:, the
3607:Women
3572:Japan
2827:(PDF)
2772:JSTOR
2733:JSTOR
2670:JSTOR
2588:JSTOR
2493:jury.
2229:
2206:
2036:
1997:
1975:JSTOR
1733:
1710:
1653:
1628:
1605:
1580:
1386:
1086:Sixth
793:like
671:Texas
351:Many
320:Texas
46:Sixth
42:Fifth
3364:Jury
3304:ISBN
3276:ISBN
3248:ISBN
3223:ISBN
3198:ISBN
3170:ISBN
3145:ISBN
3029:2019
2937:2019
2891:link
2835:2011
2809:link
2430:law.
2425:2019
2399:help
2231:U.S.
2208:U.S.
2153:2008
2066:2008
2038:U.S.
1999:U.S.
1952:2024
1924:2023
1897:2021
1869:2020
1822:2024
1800:2024
1765:2024
1735:U.S.
1712:U.S.
1655:U.S.
1630:U.S.
1607:U.S.
1582:U.S.
1556:2015
1528:2021
1503:2023
1475:2021
1450:2021
1421:OCLC
1411:ISBN
1388:U.S.
1359:ISBN
1331:ISBN
1306:ISBN
1281:ISBN
1259:2021
1234:2021
1088:and
1000:and
984:and
878:and
850:and
740:and
433:and
291:and
279:and
198:. A
143:The
128:and
102:The
3056:doi
2764:doi
2760:108
2725:doi
2662:doi
2580:doi
2234:500
2227:359
2211:149
2204:413
2041:276
2034:281
1995:380
1971:105
1889:Vox
1861:CNN
1757:NPR
1738:296
1731:542
1715:466
1708:530
1658:538
1651:489
1633:147
1626:395
1603:399
1578:399
1391:145
1384:391
1056:or
765:or
532:In
336:two
194:of
114:."
3642::
3327:-
3290:^
3256:.
3178:.
3052:20
3050:.
3046:.
3017:39
3015:.
3011:.
2977:.
2960:23
2958:.
2954:.
2923:.
2887:}}
2883:{{
2875:.
2858:56
2856:.
2852:.
2833:.
2829:.
2805:}}
2801:{{
2793:.
2770:.
2758:.
2754:.
2731:.
2721:60
2719:.
2702:52
2700:.
2696:.
2682:^
2668:.
2658:70
2656:.
2652:.
2635:14
2633:.
2629:.
2586:.
2576:89
2574:.
2536:^
2427:.
2390::
2388:}}
2384:{{
2377:.
2354:78
2352:.
2348:.
2324:^
2225:,
2202:,
2107:^
2032:,
2002:24
1993:,
1969:,
1941:.
1913:.
1886:.
1858:.
1824:.
1791:.
1785:.
1767:.
1754:.
1729:,
1706:,
1649:,
1624:,
1610:78
1601:,
1585:66
1576:,
1564:^
1547:.
1536:^
1519:.
1494:.
1483:^
1466:.
1441:.
1419:.
1382:,
1345:^
1267:^
1250:.
1225:.
1194:.
1186:,
1166:,
1125:.
1060:.
944:.
874:.
802:,
780:,
776:,
752:.
697:,
693:,
689:,
685:,
681:,
677:,
669:,
665:,
661:,
657:,
641:.
559:,
322:,
287:,
210:.
182:A
153::
3356:e
3349:t
3342:v
3312:.
3284:.
3231:.
3206:.
3153:.
3062:.
3058::
3031:.
2981:.
2939:.
2893:)
2879:.
2811:)
2778:.
2766::
2739:.
2727::
2676:.
2664::
2594:.
2582::
2401:)
2397:(
2155:.
2068:.
1954:.
1926:.
1899:.
1871:.
1802:.
1558:.
1530:.
1505:.
1477:.
1452:.
1427:.
1367:.
1339:.
1314:.
1289:.
1261:.
1236:.
94:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.