Canadian Criminal Procedure and Practice/Trials/Juries

Introduction
Jurors bring their own life experience's to their task.

A prospective juror is presumed capable of "setting aside their views and prejudices and acting impartially between the prosecution and the accused upon proper instruction by the trial judge on their duties."

Members of the jury are to come to a unanimous conclusion on the verdict. They do not have to agree on the means or path to that verdict.

Jury Selection

 * Canadian Criminal Procedure and Practice/Trials/Juries/Jury Selection

Jury Instructions/Charge

 * Canadian Criminal Procedure and Practice/Trials/Juries/Jury Instructions

Discharging a Juror
Section 644 (1) and (2) states that:

A juror can be discharged where there is well-established information that a juror's impartiality is in questioned.

The judge will make inquiries to the alleged biased juror in open court. Counsel will be able to make submissions and suggest questions to be put to the juror.

A judge has the discretion to discharge a juror under s. 644 and continue the trial or can dismiss the jury and declare a mistrial. The procedure requires the judge to:
 * 1) "apply the proper legal test for determining whether the information gives rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias”, and
 * 2) "at a minimum, conduct an inquiry into the circumstances in order to obtain the necessary information upon which to exercise his or her discretion"

Jurors can be dismissed during deliberations.

The jury can be reduced to as little as 10 members without a mistrial or a violation of s. 11(f) Charter rights.

Jury secrecy is an ancient part of the common law. The purpose is to allow juries to explore reasonings without risk of impeachment.

It exists today in section 649:

This rule, however, does not prevent the court from taking evidence from a third party or a juror about problems that may taint the verdict.

Once the jury gives a verdict the judge is functus and so cannot deal with any issues of irregularities in deliberation.

Determined facts after a jury trial
The primary principles the court must follow to determine facts subsequent to a jury trial:
 * 1) The sentencing judge must determine the facts necessary for sentencing from the issues before the jury and from the jury's verdict.
 * 2) The sentencing judge is bound by the express and implied factual implications of the jury's verdict, and must accept as proven all facts express or implied that are essential to the jury's verdict.
 * 3) The sentencing judge must not accept as fact any evidence consistent only with a verdict rejected by the jury.
 * 4) When the factual implications of the jury's verdict are ambiguous, the sentencing judge should not attempt to follow the logical processes of the jury, but should come to his or her own independent determination of the relevant facts.
 * 5) Aggravating facts must be established beyond a reasonable doubt. Other facts must be established on a balance of probabilities.
 * 6) The sentencing judge should therefore find only those facts necessary to permit the proper sentence to be imposed in the case at hand. The judge should first ask what the issues on sentencing are, and then find such facts as are necessary to deal with those issues.

Guilty plea in a Jury trial
A guilty plea before the commencement of a jury trial is to be accepted by the presiding judge. A change of plea during a jury trial should be done to the judge presiding. This is despite the fact that the accused was put in charge of the jury.

The accused does not need to re-elect to another mode of trial to put in the guilty plea. By contrast, the older method would involve the jury taking the plea directly from the accused, if the guilty plea were to occur during the trial.