Preview of Member Only Content
For full access: or Become a Member
Jury Instruction Corner
By Thomas Lundy
Duplicity— Part Four
Appellate Review of Specific Unanimity Claims
This is the fourth installment of Jury Instruction Corner on duplicity and juror unanimity. The first article discussed the constitutional and statutory underpinnings of the doctrine, the second suggested a methodology for determining when a specific unanimity instruction may be necessary, and the third discussed juror unanimity issues in the context of predicate or preliminary facts. This final article will discuss issues related to appellate review of specific unanimity claims.1
Cognizability and Standard of Review
If trial counsel objected and/or made instruction requests that preserved the specific unanimity claim, then there should be no cognizability problem on appeal and typically it will be considered under the abuse of discretion standard.2 However, even if the claim was not raised below, it may still be cognizable on appeal. Specific juror unanimity relates to the fairness of the trial and
Want to read more?
The Champion archive is reserved for NACDL members.
NACDL members, please login to read the rest of this article.
Not a member? Join now.
Or click here to see an overview of NACDL Member benefits.
See what NACDL members say about us.
To read the current issue of The Champion in its entirety, click here.
- Media inquiries: Contact NACDL's Director of Public Affairs & Communications Ivan J. Dominguez at 202-465-7662 or email@example.com
- Academic Requests: Full articles of The Champion Magazine are available for academic and research purposes in the WestLaw and LexisNexis databases.