Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Washington Supreme Court hears challenge to juror strike and GR 37 notice rule
Summary
The Washington State Supreme Court heard argument in State v. Sean Lamar Bell over whether a peremptory strike based on a prospective juror's comment that he "wasn't paying attention" required the State to give prior notice under GR 37 and whether an objective-observer, de novo review applies. Counsel clashed over timing of notice, the meaning of the juror's words, and deference to trial-court observations; the Court recessed to consider the issue.
The Washington State Supreme Court heard arguments Thursday in State v. Sean Lamar Bell about whether the State properly used a peremptory strike after a prospective juror said "I wasn't paying attention," and whether the strike should have been subject to GR 37's notice and corroboration procedures.
Petitioner counsel Britta Halverson told the Court the Court of Appeals reversed Mr. Bell's convictions because the State did not give formal notice of its intent to strike that juror, but argued GR 37(I)'s notice and corroboration requirements do not apply when a juror expressly admits inattention. "The best evidence of a juror's inattention is the jurors' own admission of their inattention," Halverson said, urging the justices to treat the juror's words as the operative fact and to reverse the Court of Appeals.
Respondent counsel Monique Mystery urged the justices to read GR 37 as a safeguard against the disproportionate removal of jurors of color…
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
