Skip to main content

Louisiana DAs warned unanimous verdicts would cause a slew of hung juries. Did it happen?

Six years ago, Louisianans were weighing the merits of requiring juries to arrive at unanimous verdicts, then the law in every other state save for Oregon.

The most vocal opposition to the idea came from district attorneys, some of whom warned that a slew of hung-jury verdicts would result if Louisiana stopped allowing convictions on 10-2 or 11-1 votes.

Louisiana voters didn’t think much of the argument: The measure to require unanimity passed by a nearly two-thirds margin. More than a thousand jury trials have taken place in the state in the years since.

Data about those trials compiled by The Times-Picayune and The Advocate shows that the tsunami of mistrials resulting from juries that couldn’t agree never materialized. In fact, the rate of hung-jury verdicts hasn’t budged at all in the years since voters changed the law.

The newspaper asked district attorneys and clerks of court in Louisiana’s busiest judicial districts for a list of jury trials since the law went into effect. Seven of them, together accounting for more than half the trials conducted in the state each year, complied.

According to the analysis, those districts have tried at least 542 cases before 12-member juries. Just 4.4% of those juries – 24 in total – couldn’t agree on a verdict on at least one charge.

A similar but larger analysis, conducted by the newspaper before the law was changed, found a hung-jury rate of 4.6%. That survey included nearly 2,000 cases tried before 12-member juries between 2011 and 2016.

The difference in the rate of hung juries before and after unanimity was required is statistically insignificant. Essentially, it’s identical.

That doesn’t mean the change in the law hasn’t had any effect on the justice system. Prosecutors and defense attorneys say it’s had a range of impacts: Longer deliberations. More cautious jury selection. In some cases, more fulsome plea discussions. And perhaps more “compromise” verdicts, with juries convicting defendants on less serious charges when unanimity on the stiffest charge is elusive.

“I don’t think it’s really changed that much,” said James Stewart, the longtime district attorney in Caddo Parish. “We were always taught to try and get 12 out of 12 because you never know who’s on that jury. Now, we’re maybe a little more careful in jury selection, because you can’t afford a mistake.”

Stewart, a former judge, was an outspoken supporter of changing the law back in 2018. He believed Louisiana should do things like the rest of the states, and he wasn’t very worried about a spike in hung juries.

His lack of concern on that point was well-founded. In Caddo Parish, just two out of 131 cases tried by the end of last year and after the new rule was in effect have resulted in hung verdicts, according to a list of cases provided by the district attorney.

“For jurors, knowing they’ve got to have 12 of 12, I think the difference is they have to spend more time discussing the evidence than they used to,” Stewart said. “And I think that mostly works out for the best.”

A slow beginning


Louisiana’s new unanimity law was passed by voters in late 2018, and it took effect Jan. 1, 2019.

But it only applied to trials involving crimes committed after the law went into effect. Because of the typical lag time between the commission of a crime and a trial, very few 2019 trials applied the new standard.

The change wasn’t fully imposed until the Supreme Court issued its blockbuster ruling in Ramos v. Louisiana on April 20, 2020. That decision upended a 1972 ruling that found split jury verdicts were constitutional.

From that day forward, all jury verdicts in Louisiana have had to be unanimous, regardless of when the crime at issue was committed. The Ramos decision was not retroactive, meaning hundreds of Louisiana inmates are still serving sentences meted out in cases with split jury verdicts.

But Ramos did apply to cases that had not gone through final appeals, and that led to scores of relatively recent cases having to be retried because the original verdict was not unanimous. That number included dozens of cases that had been tried, but not settled unanimously, after voters passed the new law.

In the jury room


It’s impossible to say definitively how the unanimity rule has affected deliberations, since every case is different and discussions occur behind closed doors.

But prosecutors and defense lawyers interviewed for this story said they are sure that deliberations are taking longer. They speculate that in many cases, the juror or jurors listed as holdouts under the old system are now being persuaded to join the majority.

That’s what happened in the case of Kevin Tasker, a Baton Rouge man who killed a friend in a 2020 argument. Tasker, who was charged with second-degree murder, admitted shooting his friend, but said he acted in self-defense as the two tussled on the pavement.

The East Baton Rouge Parish jury deliberated for nearly two hours, and came out to ask a question of the 19th District Judge Fred Crifasi about the differences between second-degree murder and manslaughter.

A half-hour later, the jury returned a manslaughter verdict. In an interview with The Advocate, forewoman Megan Varnado said 11 jurors had settled on manslaughter fairly quickly, but one woman felt a murder verdict was more appropriate.

Varnado, whose account was echoed by a second juror, said the jury’s decision stemmed in part from its view that the case was complicated — the killing wasn’t premeditated, and the men had been fighting. Jurors knew murder meant life without parole, while manslaughter gave the judge wide discretion: anything from 0 to 40 years.

“There was such a difference in the sentences — mandatory life for murder, whereas in manslaughter, the judge can say, ‘This is what I think of it,” Varnado said. ““We felt comfortable that judge would get in there and give him an appropriate sentence. We felt like he would have a really good feel for how much time this guy deserved.”

In the end, the reluctant juror came around. Crifasi later sentenced Tasker to 30 years.

'I don't have that luxury anymore'


Michael Kennedy, a New Orleans defense lawyer, said he’s seen similar impacts from the new law.

It’s led to more considered deliberations, he believes. But hopes on the defense bar that lonely voices for acquittal would sometimes win over a whole panel – as in “Twelve Angry Men” – have rarely been realized, Kennedy said.

“It was rare in the old system that you got a 12-0 conviction, and we were hoping that the one or two would hold fast, and you’d not get a conviction,” Kennedy said. “But that hasn’t really happened.”

On the other hand, he and many other lawyers think such disagreements in the age of unanimity have led to more compromise verdicts – usually, a conviction on a lesser charge.

The new law “does lend itself to more compromise verdicts,” said New Orleans defense lawyer John Fuller. “Whether that’s always a good thing for a defendant is hard to say,” he added, noting that the result of a “compromise” is still often a lengthy prison stay.

Scott Perrilloux, the longtime district attorney for the 21st Judicial District, which includes Tangipahoa, Livingston and St. Helena parishes, said he believes the changed law has given defendants a better bargaining position in plea negotiations.

“There was a day where there was two jurors I didn’t have to get,” Perrilloux said. “I don’t have that luxury anymore.”

Don Burkett, the veteran district attorney for Sabine Parish and one of the leading voices in opposition to the unanimity law back in 2018, said he’s made his peace with things.

“Getting 12 people to agree on anything is so difficult in today’s world,” Burkett said. “I always felt like 10 out of 12 ... if that’s not beyond a reasonable doubt, what is? But I lost that argument, and I’m OK with that.“

Source: nola.com, Gordon Russell, May 26, 2024

_____________________________________________________________________








"One is absolutely sickened, not by the crimes that the wicked have committed,
but by the punishments that the good have inflicted."

— Oscar Wilde



Most viewed (Last 7 days)

Florida executes Michael Tanzi

Florida on Tuesday executed a death row inmate described by one local detective as a "fledgling serial killer" for the murder of a beloved Miami Herald employee. Florida executed Michael Tanzi on Tuesday, 25 years after the murder of beloved Miami Herald employee Janet Acosta, who was attacked in broad daylight on her lunch break in 2000.   Michael Tanzi, 48, was executed by lethal injection at the Florida State Prison in Raiford and pronounced dead at 6:12 p.m. ET. 

South Carolina executes Mikal Mahdi

Mikal Mahdi, 42, was executed for the 2004 murder of 56-year-old James Myers A man facing the death penalty for committing two murders was executed by firing squad on Friday, the second such execution in the US state of South Carolina this year. Mikal Mahdi, 42, was executed for the 2004 murder of 56-year-old James Myers, an off-duty police officer, and the murder of a convenience store employee three days earlier. According to a statement from the prison, "the execution was performed by a three-person firing squad at 6:01 pm (2201 GMT)," with Mahdi pronounced dead four minutes later.

Afghanistan | Four men publicly executed by Taliban with relatives of victims shooting them 'six or seven times' at sport stadium

Four men have been publicly executed by the Taliban, with relatives of their victims shooting them several times in front of spectators at a sport stadium. Two men were shot around six to seven times by a male relative of the victims in front of spectators in Qala-i-Naw, the centre of Afghanistan's Badghis province, witnesses told an AFP journalist in the city.  The men had been 'sentenced to retaliatory punishment' for shooting other men, after their cases were 'examined very precisely and repeatedly', the statement said.  'The families of the victims were offered amnesty and peace but they refused.'

USA | Why the firing squad may be making a comeback

South Carolina plans to execute Mikal Mahdi on Friday for the murder of a police officer, draping a hood over his head and firing three bullets into his heart. The choice to die by firing squad – rather than lethal injection or the electric chair – was Mahdi’s own, his attorney said last month: “Faced with barbaric and inhumane choices, Mikal Mahdi has chosen the lesser of three evils.” If it proceeds, Mahdi’s execution would be the latest in a recent string of events that have put the spotlight on the firing squad as a handful of US death penalty states explore alternatives to lethal injection, by far the nation’s dominant execution method.

I spent 16 years in solitary in South Carolina. This is what it did to me. | Opinion

South Carolinian Randy Poindexter writes about the effects 16 years of solitary confinement had on him ahead of South Carolina’s planned execution of Mikal Mahdi , who spent months in solitary as a young man. For 16 years, I lived in a concrete cell. Twenty-three hours a day, every day, for more than 3,000 days, South Carolina kept me in solitary confinement. I was a young man before I was sent to solitary — angry, untreated and unwell. I made mistakes. But I wasn’t sentenced to madness. That’s what solitary did to me. My mental health worsened with each passing day. At first, paranoia and depression set in. Then, hallucinations and self-mutilation. I talked to people who weren’t there. I cut myself to feel something besides despair. I could do nothing as four of my friends and fellow prisoners took their own lives rather than endure another day of torturous isolation.

South Carolina | Man who ambushed off-duty cop to face firing squad in second execution of its kind

Mikal Mahdi, 48, who was found guilty of killing an off-duty police officer and a convenience store worker, is the second inmate scheduled to executed by South Carolina's new firing squad A murderer who ambushed and shot an off duty police officer eight times before burning his body in a killing spree is set to become the second person to die by firing squad. South Carolina's highest court has rejected the last major appeal from Mikal Mahdi, 41, who is to be put to death with three bullets to the heart at 6pm on April 11 at the Broad River Correctional Institution in Columbia. Mahdi's lawyers said his original lawyers put on a shallow case trying to spare his life that didn't call on relatives, teachers or people who knew him and ignored the impact of weeks spent in solitary confinement in prison as a teen.

Louisiana | Lawyers of Jessie Hoffman speak about their final moments before execution

As Louisiana prepared its first execution in 15 years, a team of lawyers from Loyola Law were working to save Jessie Hoffman’s life. “I was a young lawyer three years out of law school, and Jessie was almost finished with his appeals at that time, and my boss told me we needed to file something for Jessie because he’s in danger of being executed,” Kappel said. Kappel and her boss came up with a civil lawsuit to file that said since they wouldn’t give him a protocol for his execution, he was being deprived of due process, and the lawsuit was in the legal process for the next 10 years.

Lethal Injection, Electric Chair, or Firing Squad? An Inhumane Decision for Death Row Prisoners

South Carolina resumed executions with the firing squad killing of Brad Sigmon last month. Mikal Madhi’s execution date is days away. The curtain shrieked as it was yanked open to reveal a 67-year-old man tied to a chair. His arms were pulled uncomfortably behind his back. The red bull’s-eye target on his chest rose and fell as he desperately attempted to still his breathing. The man, Brad Sigmon, smiled at his attorney, Bo King, seated in the front row before guards placed a black bag over his head. King said Sigmon appeared to be trying his best to put on a brave face for those who had come to bear witness.

Execution date set for prisoner transferred to Oklahoma to face death penalty

An inmate who was transferred to Oklahoma last month to face the death penalty now has an execution date. George John Hanson, also known as John Fitzgerald Hanson, is scheduled to die on June 12 for the 1999 murder of 77-year-old Mary Bowles.  The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals on Tuesday set the execution date. The state’s Pardon and Parole Board has a tentative date of May 7 for Hanson’s clemency hearing, executive director Tom Bates said.

Arizona | The cruelty of isolation: There’s nothing ‘humane’ about how we treat the condemned

On March 19, I served as a witness to the execution of a man named Aaron Gunches, Arizona’s first since 2022. During his time on death row, he begged for death and was ultimately granted what is likely more appropriately described as an emotionless state-assisted suicide. This experience has profoundly impacted me, leading to deep reflection on the nature of death, humanity, and the role we play in our final moments. When someone is in the end stages of life, we talk about hospice care, comfort, care, easing suffering and humane death. We strive for a “good death” — a peaceful transition. I’ve seen good ones, and I’ve seen bad, unplanned ones.