Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Criminal Procedure topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Committee backs constitutional and statutory measures to require prosecutor consent before jury-waiver

Louisiana Senate Judiciary Committee · March 17, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Judiciary Committee moved a constitutional amendment (SB 97) and companion statute (SB 81) that would require prosecutor consent for a defendant to waive a jury trial; district attorneys' association supported the change, while defense lawyers and the ACLU opposed it as an infringement on defendants’ rights and warned it could increase jury trials.

Chairman Morris brought SB 97 to the committee as a proposed constitutional amendment that would require prosecutor consent before a defendant may waive a jury trial. Zach Daniels, executive director of the Louisiana District Attorneys Association, told the committee the measure "would bring Louisiana in line with a majority of other states" and argued it would create parity and help safeguard victims.

Opponents included Richard Sprinkle (opposition testimony) and Sarah Whittington of the ACLU of Louisiana, who said the proposal risks removing a defendant's longstanding constitutional choice and could force jury trials in cases better suited to judge trials. Whittington also asked that, if placed on the ballot, the amendment appear on a larger statewide election rather than a lower-turnout primary so the state has time to consider it.

Chris Alexander of the Louisiana Citizen Advocacy Group argued the right to a jury trial belongs to the defendant and said giving the state veto power over waivers sets a concerning precedent. Zach Daniels and Chairman Morris responded that other states and the federal system use a prosecutor-consent model and that the change would produce more parity in certain complex or strategic cases.

After testimony and questioning, the committee moved SB 97 and its statutory companion, SB 81, favorably; both bills were reported out (SB 97 as the constitutional change to be placed on the ballot and SB 81 to implement the procedure in statute).