That likely won't lead to a challenge for cause
: Reasonable doubt is a matter of personal judgment, each juror gets to decide what it means to him or her, and the prosecution isn't allowed to pick only people who agree with its definition of the term.
removing biased jurors is the role of the challenge for cause
, the most
Indeed, the Court remarked, "all three judges of the Court of Military Review implied that as reasonable persons they might have decided this challenge for cause
differently under the same facts and circumstances which faced the trial judge." (110) The second standard was based on the "appearance of evil" or "public's perception" of the military justice system were the challenged member allowed to sit on the panel.
(39) Moreover, the appellate courts have charged the trial courts with the obligation to rehabilitate a juror who has responded to voir dire questions in a manner that would sustain a challenge for cause
if no party attempts to rehabilitate the prospective juror and the trial court seats the juror.
In essence, a juror who expressed any bias that might affect his verdict, whether or not directly touching on guilt or innocence, was required to swear both parts of the expurgatory oath to avoid disqualification.(141) Even if he did so, both trial and appellate courts were entitled to look beyond the words of the oath and determine, from the entire voir dire, whether the prospective juror's testimony was sufficiently unequivocal and sincere.(142) Moreover, an erroneous denial of a challenge for cause
resulted in automatic reversal if the defendant subsequently exhausted his peremptory challenges.(143)
If the challenge for cause
fails, the challenger still has available the peremptory challenge or the stand aside.
Downing, (92) the CAAF reviewed a military judge's denial of a defense challenge for cause
against an officer member based on the member's friendship with the trial counsel.
is not indifferent between the Queen and the accused," more commonly referred to as a challenge for cause
. The central question is whether a juror may be inclined to decide in a certain way because of his or her personal beliefs rather than on the evidence presented at trial.
Regardless of whether the question arises from a challenge for cause
or a peremptory challenge, a voir dire issue is not preserved for appeal unless the trial lawyer again objects to the entire jury immediately before it is sworn.(8) Such objection can be made either by renewing the motion to disqualify or by accepting the jury subject to the earlier objection.
Though this requirement imposes a limitation in some cases on the full peremptory character of the historic challenge, we emphasize that the prosecutor's explanation need not rise to the level justifying exercise of a challenge for cause
. But the prosecutor may not rebut the defendant's prima facie case of assumption--or his intuitive judgment--that they would be partial to the defendant because of their shared race....
(61) In reversing the military judge's denial of a challenge for cause
, Judge Cox, writing for the majority, focused on the perception and appearance of fairness.
A divided Court held "the Equal Protection Clause forbids the prosecutor from challenging potential jurors solely on account of their race," but to establish a claim a defendant would have to show that he or she was a member of a "cognizable racial group" and that the challenged juror was "of the defendant's race." And, the Court warned, the prosecutor's explanation for exercising the peremptory challenge need not rise to the level of a challenge for cause
, but it must consist of something more than the assumption or intuition that the juror would be partial to the defendant because of their shared race.