Jury Selection Work Group Submits Final Report to California Supreme Court
The Jury Selection Work Group appointed by the California Supreme Court in 2020 to study issues related to discrimination in jury selection has issued its final report.
The work group, chaired by Justice Kathleen O’Leary of the Fourth District Court of Appeal, was comprised of a retired member of the California Supreme Court and current and retired justices and judges from the Courts of Appeal and trial courts.
Five attorneys served as advisory members of the work group, which was supported by Judicial Council staff. The work group’s deliberations included a public comment process in which an array of stakeholders provided input regarding the issues before the group.
Upon receiving the report, the Supreme Court issued the following statement:
The California Supreme Court is in receipt of the final report of the Jury Selection Work Group and expresses its sincere appreciation to the work group for its efforts. The court appointed the work group in 2020 to study how the principles articulated in Batson v Kentucky (1986) 476 U.S. 79 and People v. Wheeler (1978) 22 Cal.3d 258 operate in practice in California, and whether modifications or additional measures are warranted to address impermissible discrimination against cognizable groups in jury selection. The final report represents the culmination of a process in which the work group, with the benefit of public input, thoughtfully and thoroughly engaged with these issues. Going forward, the court will work with the Judicial Council and other stakeholders to further develop recommendations made by the work group regarding the collection and assessment of data pertinent to juror recruitment and selection, toward the goals of eliminating invidious discrimination in the jury selection process and better ensuring that juries represent a cross-section of their communities."
Click on the following links to access the Jury Selection Work Group's final report; appendix and transmittal letter; public comment received during the deliberative process; and the court's statement.