Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Appeals court hears challenge to Charles Jenkins’ 1989 conviction over jury questioning and prosecutor’s closing arguments
Summary
At oral argument the defense said the trial judge rushed jury selection and failed to confirm jurors would follow presumption-of-innocence protections; the Commonwealth urged waiver and argued the record shows no prejudice.
The Massachusetts Appeals Court on an oral-argument calendar heard arguments in Commonwealth v. Charles Jenkins, a challenge to Jenkins’ 1989 murder conviction. Defense attorney Rachel Rose told the three-judge panel that the trial judge denied a request for individual voir dire and “rushed through picking a jury” without asking jurors questions that would show whether they would follow due-process principles, including the presumption of innocence.
The dispute centers on whether the voir dire used at Jenkins’ 1989 trial satisfied the statutory and case-law requirement to probe whether prospective jurors would actually apply core criminal-law protections. Rose argued that asking jurors only whether they were aware of legal principles does not reveal whether they “understand, accept, or agree to” them, and that the…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
