Exercise 18

During an hour-long voir dire, both prosecution and defense separately ask a series of questions and follow-up questions to the jury panel and individual members regarding their thoughts about a victim being hesitant to testify in a criminal case. Similarly, both attorneys question the panel and individuals on views regarding law enforcement officers testifying to their involvement with the victim. As the allotted time for voir dire ends, both the prosecutor and defense counsel ask for additional time to explore those two subject areas.

How should the judge respond?

A. Advise the attorneys that based on his careful listening to the questions and answers, the judge is satisfied that the exchanges were sufficient to expose any bias or inability to be impartial based on how the victim and officer may or may not testify.

Answer A is correct! As noted in State v. Martinez, 2002-NMCA-036, ¶35, the judge overseeing voir dire, listening first hand to the attorneys' questions and the jury panel members' responses, is in the best position to determine whether voir dire has sufficiently exposed any biases that may preclude jurors from acting fairly and impartially. Both sides were allowed ample time for questions and follow-up questions of the entire panel as well as individual members on the issues of concern. This response advises the attorneys specifically of the court's reasoning in denying additional time.

B. Advise the attorneys that no more time will be given for voir dire.

Answer B is correct, but the more complete answer is Answer A. As noted in State v. Martinez, 2002-NMCA-036, ¶35, the judge overseeing voir dire, listening first hand to the attorneys' questions and the jury panel members' responses, is in the best position to determine whether voir dire has sufficiently exposed any biases that may preclude jurors from acting fairly and impartially. Both sides were allowed ample time for questions and follow-up questions of the entire panel as well as individual members on the issues of concern. Choice A advises the attorneys specifically of the court's reasoning in denying additional time. Please select Answer A.

C. Advise the attorneys that they may continue with voir dire.

Answer C is incorrect. As noted in State v. Martinez, 2002-NMCA-036, ¶35, the judge overseeing voir dire, listening first hand to the attorneys' questions and the jury panel members' responses, is in the best position to determine whether voir dire has sufficiently exposed any biases that may preclude jurors from acting fairly and impartially. Both sides were allowed ample time for questions and follow-up questions of the entire panel as well as individual members on the issues of concern. Moreover, allowing additional voir dire without any explicitly stated time limits and/or limits on the number of additional questions is contrary to the court's role of exercising its discretion to determine the extent of voir dire. Please select another answer.