19

Quoting from here, Jury nullification occurs when a jury returns a verdict of "Not Guilty" despite its belief that the defendant is guilty of the violation charged. The jury in effect nullifies a law that it believes is either immoral or wrongly applied to the defendant whose fate they are charged with deciding. In essence, a jury decides that a law ...


12

It depends on what the jury said, and if it's criminal or civil. In criminal cases, the judge may almost never set aside a verdict of acquittal. There is a single case in the US in which this happened, and it was a bench trial (no jury). That case featured the defendant bribing his trial judge; the Seventh Circuit held that he was never in jeopardy due to ...


10

Jurors don't have a "right" to jury nullification per-se. The "right" of jury nullification is really just a logical consequence of other rights that the jury and the defendant have The American jury draws its power of nullification from its right to render a general verdict in criminal trials, the inability of criminal courts to direct a verdict no ...


9

The term "jury nullification" gets thrown around a lot, especially by non-lawyers. But your question doesn't really seem to be about jury nullification. There is a well-established procedure in the federal courts of the United States, and similar structures in all state systems I'm familiar with, that allows the judge to overrule a civil jury if it finds ...


7

The concept of "jury nullification" is not really applicable to civil litigation, whether it's a bench or a jury trial. The short answer is: generally in the United States, civil judges, and civil juries, have to follow the law. If the jury doesn't follow the law, the judge can entertain and grant a JNOV motion on the basis that no reasonable jury could ...


7

Based on these two sources: http://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_education/resources/law_related_education_network/how_courts_work/juryselect.html http://criminal.lawyers.com/criminal-law-basics/reasons-for-rejecting-potential-jurors.html my understanding is that in an official sense there's nothing that's considered an invalid reason to challenge a ...


7

Historically (long, long ago to the point that there is no leading case establishing this rule), you could challenge a verdict based upon a failure of a judge to dismiss a juror for cause (or for improperly dismissing a juror for cause) when this was an abuse of discretion. Race is an improper reason to dismiss a juror for cause. Political views often ...


5

Your question isn't quite as simple as it sounds; some civil cases are tried before juries, and though a judge can give directions to a jury to give a particular verdict, they are not always required to obey; there are eighteenth-century English cases on the point that established that principle for most related jurisdictions. But your last sentence does ...


5

See jury-nullification. I'm not a legal historian, so I can't say for sure what the laws on jury acquittals were at that time in that jurisdiction. However, when a jury has final discretion to acquit a defendant of a crime that's it: They can effectively ignore laws if they want to acquit someone. Such acquittals do not set a precedent or have any bearing ...


5

In the United States, this is known as judgement notwithstanding the verdict. According to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the judge in a civil trial can override any decision by the jury if they find that no reasonable jury would have reached that decision; for procedural reasons, there must have been a prior motion for judgment as a matter of law in ...


4

Here's one answer: The federal system values judicial independence very highly and takes few steps to deter a judge from challenging existing law. Obviously, a judge who paid no mind to prior case law would see her decisions regularly reversed on appeal. But she can be removed from the bench only through the impeachment process, and lesser ...


4

A jury is charged with finding fact, and is supposed to take the law as given to them by a judge. "Jury nullification" occurs when a jury bends the law to produce a desired result. This was made possible by English common law, which gave juries great latitude in determining what they would rule on. The underlying power may go all the way back to the Magna ...


4

This is an interesting corner question that illuminates much larger and fundamental facts about law and government: In court the law is whatever the judge says it is. (And if you are subject to the court and disagree with the judge's assertion of the law then your recourses are appeals to higher courts, attempts to have the law changed or clarified, and/or ...


4

I'm asking whether it is possible for a court without a jury to rule against the technical interpretation of a law, if they determine that following the letter of it would in this single case by unjust, or contrary to the spirit. Judges are forbidden from deviating from the law properly interpreted although they have considerable freedom to interpret ...


3

In general they are not told. In fact, I am not aware of any jurisdiction where they are told by the judge officially. In fact judges will normally charge a jury that they must accept the law as stated by the judge, and ignore any other source of the law, whether they like it or not. But the Judge has no way to enforce such a charge. According to the ...


3

"Jury nullification" is normally practiced by individual jurors, who know about it. Of course, if only one person knows, s/he could educate the whole group of 12. Jury nullification is one of those kinds of things in life where, "if you have to ask, it means that you can't do it." It is barely allowed under U.S. common law, which is derived from English ...


3

The jury ultimately decides if a person is guilty or not. Jury nullification is when the person is clearly guilty or innocent, but for some odd reason the jury (who knows the person is guilty/innocent) gives the "wrong verdict" An example of this in the UK was when a guy was being charged with a spy crime years after his crime happened (I cant remember the ...


3

Currently, following Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 sections 54-57, the court can certify that interference or intimidation has resulted in acquittal, in which case the acquittal can be set aside.


2

A judge cannot overrule a decision by a jury that came about in a legal way. That is, the law basically protects juries against the consequences of their decisions. The judge can intervene in the jury process if there was something tainted. For instance, if a third party had tried to bribe one or more jurors, or some juror claimed that they were tricked or ...


2

Yes; in fact, these challenges are made, and happen, routinely. The phrase "jury nullification" is most often used by the extreme political right or extreme libertarians. But in fact all it means is a juror refusing to apply a law based on considerations other than the law he's instructed in by the judge. In those jurisdictions that still have capital ...


1

Has a case ever been thrown out in the United States by a judge or on appeal because of "jury nullification?" If so, what were the circumstances? What Is Jury Nullification In A Narrow Sense? In a criminal case, once a jury has rendered a "not guilty" verdict (excluding extremely marginal cases where, for example, the jury accidentally filled in the ...


1

Jury nullification is when a jury disregards the law in their verdict. They are "nullifying" the law. Traditionally, juries have the ultimate power to decide a case and can choose to ignore law if they consider it to be in the interest of justice to do so. That is what jury nullification is. In the situation you describe, the question is whether a higher ...


1

This amusing site on the subject of jury nullification notes that, during voir dire, lawyers will ask about nullification, usually in the slightly roundabout way: "Do you have any beliefs that might prevent you from making a decision based strictly on the law?"


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible