Courts are developing protocols for how to safely resume jury trials after the coronavirus pandemic. The defense community cannot allow expedient solutions to backlogged dockets to subvert the Constitution by sanctioning proceedings that fall short of constitutional and statutory protections.

Business as usual will be impossible as courts restart face-to-face jury trials during the coronavirus pandemic. NACDL has identified 10 fundamental principles that can minimize the constitutional burden while protecting the public and stakeholders who must come together in the courtroom.

What is the best way to resume in-person proceedings as courts reopen after closures stemming from the COVID-19 pandemic? Defendants have a right to be physically present in the courtroom. How can courts ensure a fair and constitutional process going forward?

The fact that hearings and trials can be conducted via videoconference platforms does not make these proceedings legal. Criminal trials in which some or all witnesses testify remotely are susceptible to Sixth Amendment challenges. The authors offer five factors concerning which defense counsel should ask a judge to make findings before any witness testifies via two-way videoconference.

and Faulty Translations During Court Proceedings

There is a growing demand for courtroom interpretation and a shortage of qualified interpreters. Making sure that an individual’s defense does not get lost in translation requires understanding the regulatory framework in which courtroom interpretation occurs, anticipating common problems that arise from the presence of foreign language witnesses and evidence, and developing a record when a judge adopts a questionable procedure. Defense attorney Gabriel Reyes provides some practical considerations for trial counsel.

The Sixth Amendment states that "[i]n all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to . . . trial, by an impartial jury...."  The focus on jury impartiality was rooted in the desire to preserve individual liberty in the face of a tyranical government.

In far too many regions of the country, training for both publicly-employed defenders and private counsel providing public defense services by court assignment or contract is grossly inadequate, undermining the ABA’s Ten Principles of a Public Defense Delivery System. In order to support public defense and with grant support from the Bureau of Justice Assistance, NACDL creates free national training programs for public defense providers and offers online resources to make those programs accessible nationwide.

Among the rights enumerated in the Sixth Amendment is the right to a speedy trial.

As a result of generous grant funding, NACDL is able to offer scholarship assistance to public defense attorneys to attend training programs.

Coalition letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee regarding legislation to address the judicial discretion that allows for factoring into sentencing conduct acquitted by a jury, as proposed in Prohibiting Punishment of Acquitted Conduct Act of 2021 (S. 601).

“Our constitutional rights are not suspended during a crisis. On the contrary, during difficult times we must remain the most vigilant to protect the constitutional rights of the powerless. Even when faced with limited resources, the state must fulfill its duty of protecting those in custody.”

- Judge Stacie Beckerman, Oregon

Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, court administrators have faced increasing challenges to ensuring that juries are representative, allowing for a fair and impartial trial.

NACDL President Chris Adams' letter to the New York state legislature regarding proposals to truly implement review of excessive sentences, suppression rulings, and streamlining the assignment of counsel in appeals as outlined in A5687/S1280, A5688/S1281, and A5689/S1279, respectively (2021).