13th Juror Doctrine

[wuapinmon]

This is big news today in these parts, you'll see why when you read the link:

http://www.carolinalive.com/news/story.aspx?id=470123

Apparently, in South Carolina, if the judge thinks that the juror reached an incorrect verdict, he/she can set aside the decision, prompting a potential retrying of the case. I'm wondering if any of CUF's attorneys know if this is a nation-wide practice, and if the lad who was found not-guilty is covered by double-jeopardy after one not-guilty finding?

I don't know enough about this to know where to look to find the answer.

[Jacob]

This is big news today in these parts, you'll see why when you read the link:

http://www.carolinalive.com/news/story.aspx?id=470123

Apparently, in South Carolina, if the judge thinks that the juror reached an incorrect verdict, he/she can set aside the decision, prompting a potential retrying of the case. I'm wondering if any of CUF's attorneys know if this is a nation-wide practice, and if the lad who was found not-guilty is covered by double-jeopardy after one not-guilty finding?

I don't know enough about this to know where to look to find the answer.

Judges can do that all over, but rarely do. I believe the standard is that no reasonable jury could have decided as they did. Double jeopardy doesn't attach as there actually was no finding of not-guilty. The verdict was not entered.

[SoCalCoug]

Yep, it applies in California. The judge does sit as a 13th juror, and can order a new trial if he's convinced the jury got it wrong.

However, it's pretty rare that it actually happens.

[wuapinmon]

Yep, it applies in California. The judge does sit as a 13th juror, and can order a new trial if he's convinced the jury got it wrong.

However, it's pretty rare that it actually happens.

Thanks, yall. Just wondering though if the same judge gets to sit on the next trial, and if so, could a judge conceivably do it again if the next jury reached the same decision?