Own your ow legal marijuana business | Your guide to making money in the multi-billion dollar marijuana industry |
Carl Olsen's Marijuana Archive |
|
PROPOSED LANGUAGE FOR A BILL ALLOWING FULLY INFORMED JURIES In criminal cases: "In any criminal action, upon pleading not guilty, the defendant may file an Acknowledgement of Facts with the court, which shall constitute a binding acknowledgement of the factual allegations of one or more of the charges against him; whereupon said defendant shall be entitled to a trial by jury in which, with regard to each charge for which he has acknowledged the facts, the following matters may be argued to and considered by the jury pursuant to its determination of a verdict:
The jurors shall be instructed in accordance with this section and, as part of their oath, shall affirm that they understand their role, power and responsibility in bringing in a verdict based upon the above considerations, the nature of the uncontested facts of the case notwithstanding. No party to the trial may be prevented from encouraging the jury to reach a verdict based upon such considerations. Failure by the court to instruct the jurors in accordance with this section shall be grounds for mistrial. The rights recognized under this rule include the right to a trial by jury for any person criminally charged, notwithstanding any limitation which may be placed by law or custom upon that right according to the severity of potential punishment if convicted, provided that the defendant has first filed an Acknowledgment of Facts regarding said charge. Any person exercising his right to be tried by a jury under this rule may also opt for jury selection by lot from the broadest possible pool provided by law. Should the defendant make this election, voir dire of potential jurors by both the defense and prosecution shall be limited to the challenges for cause recognized in the rules of court procedure for the jurisdiction in which the trial takes place. In no instance shall evidence that a potential juror is aware that he has the power to judge both law and fact and to vote on the verdict according to conscience, or that he holds opinions about the law(s) under which the defendant will be tried, or that he is familiar with the potential penalty(ies) which may be imposed upon conviction, constitute the basis for a challenge for cause." In civil cases: "In any civil action tried to a jury, any party may, before trial, file an Acknowledgement of Facts with the court, which shall constitute a binding acknowledgement of the factual allegations of one or more specified claims or defenses pled by an opposing party; whereupon the acknowledging party shall be entitled to a trial by jury in which, with regard to each claim or defense for which he has admitted the facts, the following matters may be argued to and considered by the jury pursuant to its determination of a verdict:
The jurors shall be instructed in accordance with this section and, as part of their oath, shall affirm that they understand their role, power and responsibility in rendering a judgment based upon the above considerations, notwithstanding the acknowledged facts of the case. No party to the trial may be prevented from encouraging the jury to reach its judgment based upon such considerations. Failure by the court to instruct the jurors in accordance with this section shall be grounds for mistrial. The rights recognized under this rule may not be used to oppose a motion for summary judgment unless the opposing party has first filed and Acknowledgement of Facts on the claim or defense at issue. Any person exercising his right to be tried by a jury under this rule may also opt for jury selection by lot from the broadest possible pool provided by law. Should the defendant make this election, voir dire of potential jurors by any and all parties to the trial shall be limited to the challenges for cause recognized in the rules of court procedure for the jurisdiction in which the trial takes place. In no instance shall evidence that a potential juror is aware that he has the power to judge both law and fact and to vote on the verdict or award according to conscience, or that he holds opinions about the law(s) under which the defendant will be tried, constitute the basis for a challenge for cause." |