Better, from your perspective, that prosecutors should use a peremptory challenge than a challenge for cause
, since they have an unlimited number of the latter but very few of the former.
failed challenge for cause
. (38) The most convincing justifications for
(103) The CAAF held the military judge erred in denying defense counsel's challenge for cause
by relying solely on the panel member's disclaimers during voir dire, and that the military judge should have presumed bias based on these factors.
* extend the protection of challenge for cause
procedures to help ensure the absence of any prohibited motives in juror deliberations;
Whether a prospective juror who has been identified as biased can be "rehabilitated" plays an essential role in the trial judge's determination of a challenge for cause
. Rehabilitation of an unacceptable juror is essentially an urban legend.
Thus, an erroneous ruling on a challenge for cause
could only be considered harmless error if the defendant subsequently failed to exhaust his peremptory challenges.
400, 405 (1955) with emphasis added) ("The accused should be allowed considerable latitude in examining members so as to be in a position to intelligently and wisely exercise a challenge for cause
or a peremptory challenge."); MCM, supra note 4, R.C.M.
The right to a challenge for cause
exists in any stage of the jury selection process, and it is not necessary that the accused exhaust his peremptory challenges prior to challenging for cause.
Despite the courts' repeated invocation of the mandate, often in the context of reversing a military judge's ruling on a challenge, no appellate court has reversed a military judge's denial of a challenge for cause
on the ground that the judge did not apply the liberal grant mandate.
A different problem arises when bias is suspected, and a lawyer wanted to ask a potential juror particular questions relating to a perceived prejudice to ascertain whether there were grounds for a "challenge for cause
" and this was recently the subject of a decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in R.
A party can preserve an error in the denial of a challenge for cause
only by 1) exhausting all his or her peremptory challenges; 2) thereafter seeking additional peremptory challenges; 3) having the request for additional challenges denied; and 4) identifying on the record which objectionable jurors he or she would excuse if granted additional challenges.(7)
Suspicion about a potential juror's performance that fell short of justifying a challenge for cause
would all but invariably be based on a generalization about some group to which the juror belongs.