Court of Appeals hears dispute over loss of six peremptory challenges in Zamirano appeal

Summary

At oral argument, defense counsel said losing all six peremptory challenges and an allegedly incorrect verdict form showing an aggravator indicate juror bias; the state urged deference to trial-court discretion and said Turner permits tactical use of peremptories. The panel took the case under advisement.

Court of Appeals judges heard oral argument in the appeal of Yaro Maraz Zamirano over whether the defense’s loss of six peremptory challenges and an allegedly incorrect jury verdict form require reversal.

At the hearing, Natalie Scubin, defense counsel for Zamirano, told the three-judge panel that “First, Turner did not rule on the issue of losing peremptory challenges to remove biased jurors at all,” and argued the combined effect of losing all six peremptory challenges, the “verdict form” that listed an aggravator the prosecution later said did not apply, and other trial errors met Utah’s prejudice standards.

The issue matters because it focuses on how appellate courts should review jury-selection rulings and whether a defendant must identify a specific biased juror to show prejudice. Scubin argued the record shows cumulative error in a case she described as one in which “the evidence was not overwhelming”…

Court of Appeals hears dispute over loss of six peremptory challenges in Zamirano appeal

Summary

Subscribe to keep reading